BT  75  .L72 
Lindberg, 

> 
Conrad  Emil, 

1852- 

1930. 

Christian 

dogmatics  an 

id 

notes 

on 

the  history 

of 

CHRISTIAN  DOGMATICS 


AND 


NOTES  ON  THE  HISTORY  OF  DOGMA 


BY 


CONRAD  EMIL  LINDBERG,  D.  D.,  LL.  D. 

PROFESSOR  OF  SYSTEMATIC   THEOLOGY 


TRANSLATION   FROM  THE  SWEDISH   BY 

REV.  C.  E.  HOFFSTEN,  B.D. 


REVISED  AND  AUGMENTED   BY 

THE  AUTHOR 


Rock  Island,  III. 

AUGUSTANA  BOOK  CONCERN 

1922 


Copyright,  1922, 

BY 

AuGUSTAXA  Book  Co>ceun'. 


TO 

MY  STUDENTS 

THIS  WORK 
IS   AFFECTIONATELY  DEDICATED, 

IN  TOKEN 

OF    UNCHANGING    FRIENDSHIP, 

BY  THE  AUTHOR. 


ORA  ET  LABORA! 


PREFACE. 


THIS  Textbook  of  Christian  Dogmatics  and  Notes  on  History 
of  Dogma  was  published  in  Swedish  in  i8g8,  with  the  excep- 
tion of  additions  made  by  the  author  for  this  edition.  The  work 
was  amply  commended  by  theologians  here  and  in  Sweden,  Bishop 
Von  Schéele  in  his  review  of  the  book  in  Teologisk  Tidskrift, 
Uppsala,  expressing  high  appreciation  of  its  scientific  value  and  prac- 
tical utility  as  a  handbook.  Time  and  again  the  author  has  been 
urged  by  theological  scholars  and  his  own  students  to  have  this  work 
published  in  English,  and  lately  a  translation  became  a  necessity  in 
the  Seminary  work. 

The  translation  of  the  Swedish  edition  is  the  result  of  intimate 
collaboration  with  my  former  pupil,  Rev.  C.  E.  Hof^sten,  B.D.,  who 
for  three  years  heard  my  lectures  on  Systematic  Theology  and  whose 
capable  rendition  into  English  of  the  original  work  has  been  minutely 
compared  by  myself.  My  grateful  appreciation  of  his  work  as  trans- 
lator is  herewith  expressed.  This  English  edition  I  have  augmented 
with  some  125  pages  of  new  material. 

Acknowledgments  are  also  due  to  Mr.  E.  W.  Olson,  A.M.,  editor 
with  the  Augustana  Book  Concern,  for  aid  in  revising  the  manuscript 
and  conducting  the  book  through  the  press. 

The  Notes  on  the  History  of  Dogma  have  been  prepared  as  a  guide 
especially  to  the  understanding  of  the  development  of  doctrines. 
While  most  histories  of  dogma  take  up  the  doctrines  by  periods,  here 
each  important  doctrine  is  treated  in  its  entirety  at  its  proper  place 
in  the  dogmatic  system,  with  the  manifest  advantage  of  an  unbroken 
and  completed  exposition. 

The  primary  aim  of  this  work  is  to  serve  as  a  textbook  in  theo- 
logical seminaries  or  as  collateral  reading  where  other  textbooks  are 
used.  The  Swedish  edition  having  been  used  extensively  by  ministers 
as  a  review  course  and  a  book  of  reference,  it  is  hoped  that  the 
English  edition  will  be  found  equally  serviceable. 


Hie  main  or  doji;matic  part  includes  only  three  sections  belonj2;ing 
to  Introduction,  Prolegomena  being  usually  treated  in  special  text- 
books or  monographs.  As  to  terminology,  the  old  dogmatic  terms 
have  been  retained,  though  also  rendered  in  English,  this  for  the 
reason  that  Latin  and  Greek  terms  are  part  of  the  universal  language 
of  theological  science,  and  as  such  they  ought  to  be  known  by  every 
student.  In  many  instances  the  old  dogmatic  definitions  are  given 
in  both  English  and  Latin.  The  English  version  is  frequently  taken 
from  Hay  and  Jacobs'  edition  of  the  Dogmatik  of  Heinrich  Schmid. 

In  quoting  the  Latin  definitions  and  terms  from  Gerhard,  Baier 
and  Hollazius  the  following  editions  have  been  used :  Gerhardi  Loci 
Theologici  (i6iO — 1621),  Lipsiae,  1885,  with  Preface  by  Frank; 
Baieri  Couipendiiun  (1694),  Berolini,  1864,  edited  by  Preuss,  and 
also  Walther's  Edition,  1879;  Hollazii  Examen  Theologicum  Acroa- 
rnaticum  (1707),  Editio  Quinta,  Stockholmia?  et  Lipsiae,  1734. 
Where  we  had  no  access  to  original  sources,  Schmid's  Dogmatik, 
Luthardt's  Compendium  and  others  were  used.  Bible  quotations  are 
from  the  American  Revised  Version,  and  passages  from  the  Con- 
cordia Pia  are  rendered  from  Die  symboliche  Biicher,  by  IMiiller, 
The  Book  of  Concord,  by  Jacobs,  and  from  Fjellstedt's  edition.  In 
regard  to  other  Confessions,  citations  have  been  made  from  The 
Creeds  of  Christendom,  by  Schaff,  or  from  sundry  monographs. 

Space  forbids  mention  of  the  leading  books  in  general  Theology, 
Dogmatics  and  History  of  Dogma  studied  during  more  than  half  a 
century  of  reading  in  four  languages.  In  the  preparation  of  this 
handbook  original  sources  have  been  used  as  far  as  available,  but 
it  has  not  been  found  desirable  to  encumber  the  text  with  a  great 
mass  of  notes  and  references.  The  book  is  not  based  upon  another, 
but  with  the  exception  of  terms  and  quoted  definitions  it  is  an  attempt 
at  presenting  the  result  of  assimilation  and  investigation  with  the 
object  previously  stated. 

It  is  my  earnest  hope  that  this  manual  of  Christian  Dogmatics  may 
serve  as  a  guide  for  devoted  students  of  Scripture  and  of  our  Lutheran 
Confessions,  and  an  aid  in  the  faithful  exposition  of  both. 

Conrad  Emil  Lindberg. 

Augustana  Theological  Seminary,   Rock  Island,   111. 

Season  of  La."tare  ct  Palmarum,  1922. 


COiNfTENTS. 


PAGE 

Definition  of  Dogmatics  and  History  of  Dogma 17 

Tlie  Principal  Periods  of  the  History  of  Dogma 18 

I.     THEOLOGY. 

§  1.     Concerning  the  Existence  of  God 19 

1.  The   Psychological   Philosophical   Proof 21 

a.  The  Budaimonistic  Proof  21 

b.  The  Ontological  Proof   21 

c.  The  Ethico-Theological  Proof   24 

2.  The  Historical  Proof  or  Argumentum  e  Consensu  Gentium  24 

3.  The  Cosmological   Proof  or   Argumentum   a  Contingentia 

Mundi   25 

4.  The   Teleological   Proof    26 

§  2.     Natural  Rev-elation    28 

Revelatio   Generalis    28 

a.  Cognitio  Insita  or  Innata 28 

b.  Cognitio    Acquisita    30 

§  3.     The  Supernatitral  Revelation 30 

Revelatio  Specialis    30 

1.  The  Possibility  of  a  Supernatural  Revelation 31 

2.  The  Necessity  of  a  Supernatural  Revelation 32 

3.  The  Reality  of  Revelation    32 

4.  The  Relation  between  Reason  and  Revelation 32 

§  4.     Concerning  the  Being  of  God 34 

1.  The  Definition  or  Conception  of  God 34 

2.  The  Divine  Being  Defined  and  the  Conception  of  the  Abso- 

lute Personality   35 

3.  Anti  -Theistic    Theories    39 

a.  Pantheism    39 

1)  Acosmism 39 

2 )  Atheism    40 

b.  Materialism   41 

c.  Positivism    41 

4.  Notes  on  the  History  of  Dogma 42 

A.  Concerning  the  Comprehensibility  and  Nature  of  God  42 

B.  Concerning  the  Unity  of  God  and  the  Primitive  Char- 

acteristics of  His  Being 43 


8  CONTKXTS. 

PAGE 

§  5.      COXCKRMNc;    TIIK    DiVI.NK   A'lTKIIUJTKS     44 

1.  The  Conception  of  the  Attributes 44 

2.  How  We  Gain  Knowledge  of  the  Divine  Attributes 46 

Via  Negationis    46 

Via  Causalitatis    46 

Via  Eminentiae    47 

3.  Division   of  the  Attributes    47 

4.  Essential   Characteristics   48 

a.  Vita  or  Life    48 

b.  Lux  or  Light    48 

c.  Amor  or  Love  49 

5.  The  Special  Attributes   50 

A.  In  Relation  to  the  Natural  World 50 

a.  Immanent   Attributes,   Distinct   from   the   Natural 

World   50 

^ternitas    50 

Immensitas  51 

Immutabilitas    51 

b.  Relative  Attributes  or  Attributes  of  Contact 53 

Omniprsesentia  53 

Omnipotentia   55 

Omniscientia    57 

Omnisapientia    58 

B.  In  Relation  to  the  Moral  World 59 

a.  Immanent    Attributes,    Distinct    from    the    Moral 

World    59 

Sanctitas,  Justitia  Interna    59 

Justitia  Externa   59 

Veracitas   60 

b.  Attributes  of  Contact  or  Relative  Attributes 61 

Amor  or  Love 61 

Fidelitas  or  Fidelity   62 

§  6.     TiiK  Tkimty   62 

1.  The   Ordinary  Methods  of  Explanation 63 

a.  Through  the  Conception  of  the  Absolute  Personality.  .  63 

b.  Through  the  Conception  of  Love 64 

c.  Through  the  Conception  of  Atonement 65 

d.  By  the  Use  of  Analogy  65 

e.  Through  the  Teaching  of  the  Word  of  God 65 

2.  Remarks  on  Terminology    67 

3.  Divisions    72 

I.     The  Ontological  Trinity    72 

A.     Actus  Personales   72 


CONTENTS.  9 

PAGE 

B.  Proprietates    Personales    75 

C.  Notiones  Personales    75 

II.     The  Economical  Trinity   76 

A.  Opera  Oeconomica  76 

B.  Opera  Attributiva    76 

4.     Notes  on  the  History  of  Dogma 77 

§  7.     The  Eternal  Purpose  of  God 85 

1.  The  General  Benevolence  of  God 85 

2.  The  Special  Will  or  Benevolence  of  God 86 

3.  Concerning   Reprobation 95 

4.  Notes  on  the  History  of  Dogma 96 

§  8.     The    Creation    103 

1.  The  Modus  of  Creation    105 

2.  The  Effectus  of  Creation   110 

3.  The  Objects  of  Creation    110 

4.  Notes  on  the  History  of  Dogma Ill 

§  9.     Providence    113 

I.     Providentia  Ordinaria  or  Mediata 114 

1.  The  Definition  of  Providence    114 

2.  The  Object  of  Providence  115 

3.  The  Special  Acts  of  Providence 116 

A.  Conservatio  or  Preservation    116 

B.  Concursus  or  Concurrence   117 

C.  Gubernatio   or   Government    119 

a.  Permissio    120 

b.  Impeditio     121 

c.  Directio    121 

d.  Determinatio    121 

4.  The  Objects  of  Providence    122 

II.     Providentia  Extraordinaria   or   Immediata 122 

1.  The  Conception  of  Miracles  122 

2.  The  Possibility  of  Miracles   123 

3.  The  Truth  of  Miracles.— Their  Division 124 

4.  The  Object  of  the  Miracles   124 

5.  Notes  on  the  History  of  Dogma 125 

§  10.     The  Angels    126 

I.     The  Good  Angels    128 

1.  Their  Attributes    128 

2.  Their  Abode  and  Degrees  129 

3.  The  Occupation  of  the  Angels  and  Their  Relation  to 

Men    131 

4.  The  Objects  of  the  Activities  of  the  Angels 133 

5.  Notes  on  the  History  of  Dogma 133 


10  COXTEXTS. 

PAGE 

II.     The  Evil  Angels   135 

1.  The  Existence  of  Satan  and  the  Evil  Angels 135 

2.  The  Original  and  Present  Condition  of  the  Evil  Angels  136 

3.  Their  Attributes    137 

4.  Their  Habitation  and  Gradation   138 

5.  Their  Occupation  138 

6.  The  Punishment  of  the  Fallen  Angels 141 

7.  Notes  on  the  History  of  Dogma 141 

II.  ANTHROPOLOGY. 

•§  11.     Max    144 

1.  The  Creation  of  Man   144 

2.  The  Unity  of  the  Human  Race  and  Divergent  Theories  of 

Creation   145 

3.  The  Component  Parts  of  Man's  Being  or  Nature 147 

4.  The  Propagation  of  the  Soul   149 

5.  Notes  on  the  History  of  Dogma 152 

§  12.     TiiK  Okigixal  State    154 

Status  Integritatis  vel   Innocentiae    154 

1.  Divisions    and   Attributes    156 

A.  The  Formal  Image  156 

B.  The  Material  Image    156 

2.  The  Attributes  of  the  Image  of  God 157 

3.  The  Purpose  or  the  Object  of  the  Image  of  God 158 

4.  Notes  on  the  History  of  Dogma 158 

§  13.     The  Fall  axu  Origixal  Six   161 

1.  The  Origin  of  Sin    161 

2.  Concerning  Original  Sin  and  its  Definition 163 

3.  Characteristics  or  Affectiones    165 

4.  Imputatio  or  Imputation   166 

5.  The  Effects  of  Original  Sin  or  Effectus 167 

6.  Notes  on  the  History  of  Dogma 168 

§14.     Actual  Six    173 

1.  The  Characterization  of  Actual  Sin   173 

2.  Classification  of  Actual  Sins    175 

3.  The  Effects  of  Actual  Sin 179 

§  15.     TiiK  Freedom  of  the  Will  and  Moral  Boxdage 179 

1.  Definition  of  the  Subject   179 

2.  The  Loss  of  Free  Will  in  Spiritual  Things 180 

3.  The  Two  Hemispheres   180 

4.  Human  Freedom  and  the  Grace  of  God 181 

5.  Notes  on  the  History  of  Dogma 184 


CONTENTS.  11 

III.     CHRISTOLOGY.  page 

§  16.     The  Necessity  and  the  Reality  of  the  God-Man 190 

1.  The  Necessity  of  the  God-Man 191 

2.  The  Possibility  of  the  God-Man 192 

3.  Concerning  the  Incarnation   -  192 

4.  Concerning  the  Divinity  of  Jesus 195 

5.  Concerning  the  Humanity  of  Jesus  Christ 196 

6.  Notes   on   the    History   of    Dogma 199 

§  17.     Unio  Personalis  and  its  Immediate  Resuxts 209 

1.  The  Personal  Union    210 

2.  The  Communion  of  the  Natures 211 

3.  The  Personal  Propositions    213 

§  18.     Communicatio   Idiomatum 215 

I.     Genus  Idiomaticum 216 

II.     Genus    Majestaticum    217 

1.  Concerning  Modus  Communicandi 219 

2.  Division  and  Communication  of  the  Attributes 219 

1)  Immanent    220 

2)  Relative    220 

a)  Omnipotence    220 

b)  Omniscience    220 

c)  Omnipresence    221 

III.     Genus  Apotelesmaticum    225 

§  19.     The  Two  States  of  Christ 227 

I.     The  State  of  Exinanition  or  Humiliation 227 

1.  The  Definition  of  Humiliation    227 

2.  The  Grades  of  Exinanition  or  the  State  of  Humiliation  235 

3.  The  New  Development  of  the  Kenosis  Doctrine 236 

II.     The  State  of  Exaltation   238 

1.  The  Definition  of  Exaltation    238 

2.  The  Grades  of  Exaltation  ». 239 

1)  Descensus  ad  Inferos  240 

2 )  Resurrectio  Externa 242 

3)  Ascensus  in  Ccelum    243 

4)  Sessio  ad  Dextram  Dei   244 

Notes  on  the  History  of  Dogma 245 

IV.     SOTERIOLOGY. 

§  20.     The  Prophetic  Office  of  Christ 252 

1.  Christ  as  Teacher    253 

2.  The  Prophecies  of  Christ    254 

3.  Christ  as  a  Worker  of  Miracles 254 

4.  The  Object  of  the  Prophetic  Office  of  Christ 255 


12  CONTENTS. 

PAGE 

§  21.     TiiK  Sackudotai,  Oi  kick  ok  Chkist   256 

I.     The  Reconciliation  or  the  Atonement  in  the  General  Sense  257 

1.  The  Necessity  of  the  Atonement   257 

2.  The  Subject  of  the  Reconciliation  or  Atonement...  259 

3.  The  Concept  of  the  Reconciliation  or  Atonement...  260 

1 )  Satisfactio    261 

2 )  Expiatio    262 

4.  The  Attributes  of  the  Reconciliation  or  Atonement.  .  267 

5.  The  Object  of  the  Reconciliation   263 

6.  The  Effects  of  the  Reconciliation  or  Atonement....  271 
II.     Concerning    the    High-Priestly    Intercessory    Prayer    of 

Christ    273 

Notes  on  the  History  of  Dogma 274 

§  22.     The  Regal  Office  of  Chiust   285 

1.  Christ  as  King   283 

2.  The  Kingdom  of  Christ  or  the  Kingdom  of  God 287 

1 )  Regnum    Potential    288 

2 )  Regnum   Gratia?    288 

3)  Regnum   Justitiae    291 

4)  Regnum    Glorise    292 

V.     PNEUMATOLOGY. 

§  23.     The  Grace  of  the  Holy  Ghost  and  the  Okuek  ok  Salvation  295 

1.  The  Definition  of  the  Grace  of  God  and  its  Division 296 

2.  The  Attributive  Terms  Applied  to  Grace 237 

3.  Ordo  Salutis  or  the  Order  of  Salvation 298 

§  24.     Vocation     301 

1.  The  Division  of  the   Call 302 

2.  The  Means  and  Mode  of  the  Call   303 

3.  The  Attributes  of  Vocation  304 

4.  The  Object  of  the  Call    305 

§  25.     Ilhimination    306 

1.  The  Division  of  Illumination    307 

2.  The  Means  and  the  Mode  of  Illumination 308 

3.  The  Activity  and  Object  of  Illumination 310 

§  26.     CONVEUSION     311 

I.     The  General  Characteristics  of  Conversion 311 

1.  The  Division  of  Conversion  311 

2.  The  Starting  Point  of  Conversion   312 

3.  The  Factors  in  Conversion   312 

4.  The  Object  of  Conversion    314 


CONTENTS.  13 

PAGE 

II.     Contrition    314 

1.  The  Requisites  and  Marks  of  Contrition 315 

2.  The  Object  of  Contrition    317 

5.     The  Effects  of  Contrition   317 

III.     Faith   318 

1.  The  Elements  of  Faith   319 

2.  The  Attributes  of  Faith    320 

3.  The  Effect  and  Object  of  Faith 321 

Notes  on  the  History  of  Dogma 322 

§  27.     Justification    325 

1.  The  Definition  of  Justification  326 

2.  The  Acts  or  Parts  of  Justification 329 

3.  The  Means   of  Justification    331 

4.  The  Attributes  of  Justification   333 

5.  The  Purpose  and  Effect  of  Justification 334 

6.  Notes  on  the  History  of  Dogma 335 

§  28.     Regeneration    342 

1.  The  Definition  of  Regeneration  343 

2.  The  Causes  of  Regeneration    348 

3.  The  Starting  Point  and  End  of  Regeneration 349 

§  29.     The  Mystical  Union    349 

1.  The  Definition  of  the  Mystical  Union 350 

2.  Negative  and   Positive  Characteristics 351 

3.  Testimonium  Spiritus  Sancti  Internum   352 

§  30.     Renovation    355 

1.  The  Definition  of  Renovation    356 

2.  The  Degrees  of  Renovation  and  Sanctification 357 

3.  The  Proof  of  Renovation  in  Good  Works 358 

4.  The  Object  of  Renovation 361 

§  31.     Conservation    •. 362 

1.  The  Definition  of  Conservation   362 

2.  The  Means  and  Manner  of  Conservation 364 

3.  The  Goal  of  Conservation    365 

VI.     ECCLESIOLOGY. 

§  32.     The  Church  366 

1.  Definition    367 

2.  The  Founder  and  Head  of  the  Church 370 

3.  Materia  et  Forma  Ecclesiae  371 

4.  The  Attributes  of  the  Church  372 

A.  Attributa  Ecclesise  Vulgo    372 

B.  Attributa  Ecclesiae  Particularia  373 


14  CONTENTS. 

PAG  K 

5.  Status    Ecclesise    376 

6.  The  Aim  and  Purpose  of  the  Church 377 

7.  Notes  on  the  History  of  Dogma 377 

§  33.     TiiK  Means  of  Gkace  in  General 384 

1.  The  Necessity  of  the  Means  of  Grace 384 

2.  God's  Relation  to  the  Means  of  Grace 385 

3.  The  Effect  of  the  Means  of  Grace  in  General 386 

§  34.     The  Inspiration  and  Authority  of  Holy  Scriptire 387 

1.  The  Definition  of  Inspiration  388 

2.  The   Constituent  Parts   of   Inspiration 394 

3.  The  Attributes  of  Holy  Scripture    398 

4.  Notes  on  the  History  of  Dogma 400 

§  35.     The  Word  of  God  as  a  Means  of  Grace 404 

1.  The  Power  of  the  Word  of  God  as  a  Means  of  Grace. . .  .   405 

2.  Negative  and  Positive  Terms   406 

3.  The  Contents  of  the  Word,  or  the  Law  and  the  Gospel. . .   407 

4.  Notes  on  the  History  of  Dogma 409 

§  36.     The    Sacraments    414 

1.  Definition  of   Sacrament    414 

2.  The  Forma  et  Materia  of  the  Sacraments 415 

3.  The  Effects  of  the  Sacraments   416 

4.  Notes  on  the  History  of  Dogma 417 

§  37.     Baptism    420 

1.  The  Definition  of  Baptism    421 

2.  The  Necessity  of  Baptism    422 

3.  The  Elements  of  Baptism   424 

4.  The  Formale  or  Modus  of  Baptism 425 

5.  The  Subjects  of  Baptism 428 

6.  The  Effect  and  Purpose  of  Baptism 432 

7.  Notes  on  the  History  of  Dogma 435 

§  38.     The   Lord's   Supper    441 

1.  Definition  of  the  Lord's  Supper 442 

2.  The  Form  of  the  Lord's  Supper 442 

3.  The  Elements  of  the  Lord's  Supper 443 

4.  Further  Definition  and  Explanation  of  the  Doctrine....  444 

1)  The  Lord's  Supper  Is  a  Sacrament 447 

2)  The  Lord's  Supper  is  a  Real  Supper 448 

3)  The  Lord's  Supper  Constitutes  a  Covenant  Action...  448 

4)  The  Body  and  Blood  of  Christ  Are  the  Sacramental 

Objects   449 

5)  The  Sacramental  Objects  Are  Really  Present  in  the 

Lord's  Supper    452 


CONTENTS.  15 

PAGE 

6)  The  Bread  and  Wine  Are  Vehicles  of  the   Heavenly 

Elements    456 

7)  The  Heavenly  Elements  Are  Received  by  All  the  Com- 

municants       458 

8)  Manducatio  Oralis   459 

'     5.     The  Effect  and  Object  of  the  Lord's  Supper 459 

6.     Notes  on  the  History  of  Dogma 462 

39.     The  Office  of  the  Ministry 469 

1.  Definition  of  the  Ministry    470 

2.  The  Call  to  the  Ministry   470 

1)  Necessitas  Vocationis   470 

2)  Attributa  Vocationis   471 

3)  Partes   Vocationis    471 

3.  More  Precise  Definition  of  Ordination 472 

1)  Ordinatio     472 

2 )  Necessitas   Ordinationis   472 

3)  The  Different  Parts  of  the  Act  of  Ordination 473 

4)  The  ^^dpiCTfjia  of   Ordination    473 

4.  Potestas  Ministerii  Ecclesiastici    474 

5.  The  Object  of  the  Ministry  474 

6.  Notes  on  the  History  of  Dogma 475 


VII.     ESCHATOLOGY. 

40.  Death   and   the   Intermediate   State 484 

1.  Death    484 

2.  Immortality    486 

3)   The  Nature  of  the  Intermediate   State 489 

1)  Hades   487 

2)  Paradise    489 

3)  The  Nature  of  hte  Intermediate  State. 489 

4.     Notes  on  the  History  of  Dogma 496 

41.  The  Last  TutEs   500 

1.  The  General  Spread  of  Christianity 501 

2.  Antichristianity    503 

3.  The  Signs  of  the  Last  Times 510 

1)  Remota    510 

2)  Propinqua    512 

3)  Propinquiora    512 

4)  Proxinja    515 

i  42.     The  Second  Coming  of  Christ 521 

1.  Definition  of  the  Second  Advent 52? 

2.  The  Attributes  of  the  Second  Advent 523 


16  CO.NTKNTS. 

PAGE 

3.  The  Effects  of  the  Second  Advent   528 

4.  Notes  on  the  History  of  Dogma 533 

§  43.     TiiK   Ressurectiox    540 

1.  The  Definition  of  the  Resurrection   541 

2.  Further  Definition  of  the  Resurrection  542 

3.  The  Object  of  the  Resurrection 548 

4.  Notes  on  the  History  of  Dogma 548 

§  44.      Till-,  Jl-DOMENT    552 

1.  Judgment   Defined    552 

2.  The  Factors  of  the  Judgment   556 

1)  The  Subject  of  the  Judgment  556 

2 )  The  Object  of  the  Judgment  556 

3)  The  Modus  of  the  Judgment   557 

4)  The  Day  of  Judgment    558 

3.  The  Object  of  the  Judgment   561 

§  45.     TiiK  End  of  the  World   561 

1.  The  Destruction  of  the  World   561 

2.  The  Restoration  of  All  Things 563 

3.  Notes  on  the  History  of  Dogma 564 

§  46.     Eternal   Damnatio.x    566 

1.  Eternal  Death   566 

2.  The  Character  of  the  Eternal  Punishments 569 

3.  Notes  on  the  History  of  Dogma 570 

§  47.     Eternal    Salvation    572 

1.  Eternal  Life  573 

2.  The  Blessings  of  Everlasting  Salvation 574 

Index   581 


CHRISTIAN   DOGMATICS 

A  N  IJ 

NOTES  ON  THE  HISTORY  OF  DOGMA. 


The  Science  of  Theologij  is  generally  divided  into  four 
main  divisions :  Exegetical,  Historical,  Systematic,  and 
Practical  Theology.  Exegetical  Theology  constitutes  the 
foundation;  Historical  Theology  gathers  and  supplies  the 
material  for  the  doctrinal  edifice;  Systematic  Theology  is 
the  edifice  itself;  while  Practical  Theology  constitutes  the 
adornment  of  the  building  and  indicates  the  purposes  for 
which  it  is  to  be  used.  Among  the  disciplines  of  Systematic 
Theology  Dogmatics  occupies  the  chief  place. 

Dogmatics  is  that  science  which  systematically  develops 
and  defines  the  Christian  dogmas  mediated  bij  faith  in  co7i- 
formity  unth  the  teaching  of  the  Bible  and  the  Church. 

This  science  includes  the  following  seven  divisions:  1) 
Theology;  2)  Anthropology;  3)  Christology;  4)  Soteriolo- 
gy;  5)  Pneumatology ;  6)   Ecclesiology ;  7)   Eschatology. 

The  study  of  Dogmatics  should  include  also  the  most  im- 
portant parts  of  the  history  of  dogma. 

The  History  of  Dogma  is  that  part  of  historical  theology 
ivhich  sets  fo7'th  the  gradual  development  and  for^mulation 
of  the  Christian  doctrines  as  to  their  genesis,  groivth,  more 
precise  definition  and.  final  form  during  the  various  periods 
of  Church  History. 

Doijmatics.      2. 


18 

The  principal  periods  are  the  following: 

I.  The  Apologetical  Period  from  70  to  254  A.  D. 
(Death  of  Origen). 

II.  The  Polemical  Period  from  Origen  to  John  of  Da- 
mascus (254—754  A.  D.). 

III.  The  Catholic  Scholastic  Period  from  John  of 
Damascus  to  the  Reformation  (754 — 1517). 

IV.  The  Reformation  or  Protestant  Scholastic  Pe- 
riod from  the  beginning  of  the  Reformation  to  Leibnitz  and 
Wolff  (1517—1716  or  1754). 

V.  The  Speculative  and  Modern  Critical  Period. 


I.     THEOLOGY. 


Theology  constitutes  that  part  of  Dogmatics  which  treats 
of  the  doctrine  of  God  and  includes  the  following  main  sub- 
jects: The  Existence  of  God,  Natural  Revelation,  Super- 
natural Revelation,  God  as  the  Absolute  Personality,  the 
Divine  Attributes,  the  Doctrine  of  the  Trinity,  Election, 
Creation,  Providence,  the  Good  Angels  and  the  Evil  Angels. 

Opinions  differ  as  to  whether  the  proofs  for  the  existence 
of  God  together  with  the  doctrines  of  natural  and  super- 
natural revelation  should  be  included  in  Dogmatics.  Strictly 
speaking,  these  should  be  treated  in  Prolegomena  or  Apolo- 
getics. Different  opinions  have  also  been  expressed  con- 
cerning the  place  of  Angelology  in  the  dogmatic  system. 

§1.     CONCERNING  THE  EXISTENCE  OF  GOD. 

Christian  Dogmatics  presupposes  God's  existence.  If  God 
did  not  exist,  no  theology  could  be  written.  Every  man  is 
certain  of  his  own  existence  and  is  likewise  convinced  that 
other  men  exist.  Whatever  certain  philosophical  systems 
may  present  concerning  the  reality  of  the  world,  but  few 
doubt  its  existence.  Inasmuch  as  it  cannot  be  proved  that 
man  and  the  world  are  eternal,  they  must  have  had  a  begin- 
ning and  in  such  case  necessarily  a  cause.  The  concept  of 
causality  has  therefore  great  weight  in  proving  God's  ex- 
istence. This  concept  is  also  of  the  greatest  importance  in 
relation  to  the  proof  of  God's  existence  which  is  based  on 
our  idea  concerning  a  higher  being.  It  may  likewise  be 
stated  as  a  generally  acknowledged  fact  that  religion  is  the 
basic  element  in  human  personality.  The  existence  of  God 
belongs  to  the  content  of  religion  and  is  therefore  as  certain 


20  TIIKOI.OCiY. 

as  the  existence  of  man  himself.  In  accordance  with  the 
concept  of  causality  as  a  proof  of  God's  existence  we  con- 
sider God  as  a  cause  by  reason  of  the  fact  that  we  know 
ourselves  as  causes.  We  know  ourselves  as  causes  because 
we  are  conscious  of  our  will.  To  will  is  to  cause.  Further- 
more, by  virtue  of  the  exercise  of  the  powers  of  our  under- 
standing we  reach  the  conclusion  that  God  is  not  only  the 
first  cause  but  that  He  is  likewise  the  greatest  intellect. 
The  clearly  revealed  purpose  in  the  world  in  things  great 
and  small  has  also  great  weight  in  the  proof  of  God's  ex- 
istence. We  may  also  state  that  our  knowledge  of  God  is 
acquired  in  the  same  manner  as  the  knowledge  of  our  fellow 
men.  This  latter  knowledge  is  no  more  a  priori  and  intu- 
itive than  our  knowledge  of  God.  Our  heavenly  Father  be- 
comes known  in  very  much  the  same  way  as  an  earthly 
father  and  mother.  Real  character  cannot  be  discerned 
with  the  physical  eye  nor  comprehended  by  the  senses.  The 
child,  however,  soon  learns  to  know  its  parents  and  the 
spirit  that  dwells  in  them.  The  children  of  men  are  likewise 
so  constituted  that  they  may  know  the  Father  of  spirits 
through  His  works. 

There  are  some  who  consider  that  the  existence  of  God 
cannot  be  proved.  JACOBI  said :  "A  God  that  can  be  proved 
is  no  God."  Kant  denies  that  we  can  know  anything  of 
God  through  theoretical  reasoning.  Fichte  made  light  of 
the  proofs  and  stated  that  the  Supreme  Being  was  equiva- 
lent to  the  moral  government  of  the  world.  Hegel,  who 
proclaimed  the  identity  of  thought  and  being,  simply  stated 
that  man's  knowledge  of  God  was  the  same  as  God's  knowl- 
edge of  Himself.  Others  have  expressed  opinions  along 
the  same  or  similar  lines. 

Even  if  objections  may  be  raised  against  the  common 
proofs  for  the  existence  of  God,  they  nevertheless  possess 
relative  value,  particularly  from  the  viewpoint  of  Apolo- 
getics. Generally  speaking,  a  Christian  needs  no  such 
proofs,  but  in  the  hour  of  doubt  and  spiritual  assault  they 
become  of  great  value  and  help. 

In  presenting  arguments  to  prove  the  existence  of  God 


THE   EXISTEXC'K    OF    GOD.  21 

the  following  methods  must  be  rejected:  1)  When  men 
essay  to  prove  God's  existence  as  they  would  that  of  a  ma- 
terial object;  2)  when  proofs  are  asserted  to  be  based  on 
direct  or  intuitive  experience;  3)  argumentum  a  ticto, 
which  implies  that  it  is  doubtful  whether  or  not  God  exists, 
but  that  it  is  safer  to  assume  His  existence  and  does  no 
harm,  while  it  may  be  dangerous  to  deny  His  existence,  if 
He  does  exist;  4)  argume^itum  ab  utili,  which  sets  forth 
the  great  benefit  of  faith  in  a  personal  God. 

The  ordinary  proofs  of  God's  existence  are  the  following : 

1.    The  Psychological  Philosophical  Proof. 

Human  personality  is  made  up  of  a  union  of  receptivity, 
which  finds  expression  in  the  emotions,  and  spontaneity, 
expressed  in  thought  and  will.  From  these  three  viewpoints 
the  proof  is  divided  as  follows : 

a.  The  Eudaimonistic  Proof. 

The  human  emotions  find  no  rest  in  themselves  nor  in 
man.  The  world  with  all  that  is  finitely  good  in  it  cannot 
satisfy  the  soul.  Man  feels  that  there  must  be  something 
higher,  something  absolutely  good,  yea,  an  absolutely  good 
personality.     This  absolute  personality  is  God. 

Augustine  in  his  Confessiones,  I.  1,  says :  "Fecisti  nos 
ad  Te,  et  inquietum  est  cor  nostrum,  donee  requiescat  in  Te." 

Kant  presents  a  eudaimonistic  proof,  but  confuses  it 
with  the  moral  proof.  He  says  that  harmony  between  the 
internal  and  external  is  not  found  on  earth,  for  which  reason 
there  must  be  an  absolute  being  who  at  least  in  another 
world  must  abolish  discord  between  the  desire  for  happi- 
ness and  the  requirements  of  the  moral  law. 

b.  The  Ontological  Proof. 

The  expression  is  derived  from  ck  twv  oi/rwv=from  the  es- 
sence of  things.  This  is  an  a  priori  argument,  but  not  in 
the  sense  that  we  should  find  in  it  a  cause  of  God's  existence. 
The  argument  proves  His  existence  to  us,  but  His  existence 
is  not  dependent  on  the  argument. 

Man  is  so  constituted  that  in  all  his  reasoning  he  con- 


22  THEOLOGY. 

eludes  that  there  must  be  an  absolute  being.  He  possesses 
an  innate  idea  of  an  absolute  personality  or  a  supreme  being. 
When  through  education  he  learns  to  know  of  God,  his  un- 
derstanding apprehends  the  reality  of  this  truth  and  his 
heart  says  yea  and  amen  thereto.  Man  thinks  of  himself  as 
real,  and  since  God  constitutes  his  highest  thought,  he  con- 
ceives of  God  as  the  most  real  and  the  most  perfect  being 
(ens  realissimum  et  perfectissimum) ,  The  most  real  and 
the  most  perfect  being  must  exist  not  only  in  our  thought 
but  in  reality.  The  proof  has  been  presented  in  many  ways. 
There  are  certain  indications  of  it  in  Plato  and  Kleanthes. 
Some  even  assert  that  Plato  suggested  the  proof,  while 
Anselm  merely  perfected  the  syllogistic  form.  Augustine 
presents  a  proof  that  is  analogous  to  the  ontological  proof. 
He  said :  "Nothing  higher  than  truth  can  be  thought,  because 
it  embraces  all  true  being."  He  also  declared  that  God  a? 
the  highest  truth  must  exist,  because  truth  is  sought  at  all 
times  and  by  all  men  as  something  that  is  certain  and  un- 
changeable. 

Anselm's  Proof  sets  forth  that  man  has  an  idea  of  a  most 
perfect  being,  but  perfection  implies  real  existence.  All 
men  have  an  idea  concerning  God,  even  those  who  deny  it, 
because  it  is  impossible  to  deny  something  concerning  which 
men  have  no  idea.  The  thought  of  God  is  the  idea  of  a 
being  who  is  absolutely  perfect,  a  personality  than  whom 
there  is  none  higher.  When  we  realize  that  we  are  imper- 
fect and  yet  exist,  it  is  self-evident  that  the  most  perfect 
being  must  exist;  otherwise  the  most  perfect  being  would 
be  less  perfect  than  we  are.  The  idea  of  a  most  perfect 
being  proves  the  existence  of  such  a  being.  Existence  is 
thus  proven,  otherwise  we  might  imagine  that  a  still  higher 
being  existed. 

.  Descartes  presents  the  second  main  form  of  the  proof. 
He  considered  that  all  other  ideas  except  the  idea  of  God 
contain  only  the  characteristics  of  possibility  and  contin- 
gency (contingentia),  but  the  idea  of  God  implies  necessaria 
et  aeterna  existentia.  Because  we  have  ideas  that  possess 
no  corresponding  reality,  therefore  we  are  uncertain  as  to 


THE   EXISTENCE   OF   GOD.  23 

whether  or  not  the  idea  of  God  may  not  be  simply  a  product 
of  our  thought.  But  he  endeavors  to  prove  that  the  idea 
of  God  is  innate,  that  this  idea  is  not  adventicia,  because  it 
could  not  pcFsibly  come  w^holly  from  without,  nor  yet  facticia 
by  abs..-.„..^n,  since  it  is  only  by  abstraction  from  the 
finite  that  we  reach  the  infinite.  He  considered  that  ex- 
istence was  inherent  in  the  essence  of  God.  Existence  as 
a  mark  of  perfection  could  not  be  thought  of  as  an  attribute. 
He  taught  that  inasmuch  as  the  idea  of  God  was  innate, 
therefore  the  cause  could  not  be  less  real  than  the  effect. 
The  Cartesian  Proof  is  twofold:  1)  We  have  an  idea  con- 
cerning an  absolutely  perfect  being  and  in  this  idea  itself 
lies  the  proof  of  the  existence  of  such  a  being.  2)  We  are 
imperfect,  but  nevertheless  have  an  innate  idea  concerning 
a  perfect  being.  Only  a  perfect  being  could  give  us  this 
idea.  The  saying  of  Descartes  :  "I  think,  therefore  I  am," 
also  proves  the  existence  of  God,  as  all  human  beings  have 
not  only  self -consciousness,  but  also  God-consciousness.  We 
think  God  and  cannot  get  rid  of  this  thought;  therefore, 
God  exists  just  as  surely  as  we  exist. 

Of  course,  the  ontological  proof  has  been  criticised.  The 
monk  Gaunilo  says  that  thinking  a  thing  does  not  neces- 
sarily make  it  real.  He  uses  the  following  figure :  K  some- 
one in  speaking  of  an  island  declared  it  to  be  more  perfect 
than  all  other  known  islands,  intending  thereby  to  draw  the 
conclusion  that  it  existed,  that  it  would  not  be  the  best  and 
most  perfect  if  it  did  not  exist,  then  one  would  not  know 
who  was  the  more  foolish,  the  one  who  presented  the  proof 
or  the  one  who  believed  it.  The  existence  of  the  island  must 
be  proved  first.  Anselm  defended  himself  against  Gaunilo.* 
It  is  evident  that  Gaunilo  and  Anselm  argue  from  difi'erent 
viewpoints.  Anselm  said,  if  the  island  was  necessary,  he 
would  find  it.    God  is  a  necessary  thought, 

Kant  enters  an  objection  and  declares  that  existence  is 
not  perfection  and  that  an  idea  is  just  as  perfect  whether 
the  corresponding  reality  exists  or  not.     It  is  only  through 

*  Hagenbach's  History  of  Dogma,   §163. 


24  TIIEOLOOY. 

the  processes  of  reason  that  man  can  know  how  he  under- 
stands God.  Hegel  confuses  human  thought  with  the  di- 
vine essence  and  denies  a  personal  God.  In  accordance 
with  the  Hegelian  philosophy  the  ontological  proof  is  a  true, 
speculative  proof  when  the  assertion :  God  is  thought,  there- 
fore He  exists,  is  changed  to :  God  thinks,  that  is.  He  exists. 
The  ontological  proof  is,  however,  not  a  mixture  of 
thought  and  being,  nor  yet  the  result  of  a  subjective  thought. 
Rather  man  possesses  an  innate  idea  of  God  and  in  all  his 
thinking  proceeds  from  and  returns  to  God,  whose  existence 
is  just  as  certain  as  his  own  self-consciousness. 

c.     The  Et/iico-Theological  Proof. 

The  will  of  man  cannot  be  ethically  determined  by  any 
human  will,  nor  in  the  last  instance  can  it  be  determined 
by  impersonal  nature.  The  human  will  points  to  a  personal 
God  by  whom  it  is  materially  determined  so  that  the  formal 
freedom  receives  its  proper  content.  This  proof  has  two 
forms  or  names:  1)  Argumentiim  a  conscientia  recti  or 
the  proof  of  conscience,  which  implies  that  conscience  is 
aware  of  the  moral  law  and  that  man  perceives  an  inner 
voice  which  convinces  him  of  the  existence  of  a  higher 
being.  2)  Argumentum  7norale  or  the  moral  proof  by  which 
man,  conscious  of  the  union  of  virtue  and  blessedness, 
draws  the  conclusion  that  a  higher  being  must  exist  who 
shall  reward  the  virtuous  and  punish  the  unrighteous. 

This  proof  was  presented  by  Cicero  and  Seneca.  Later 
also  by  Abelard  and  Raimund  of  Sabunde.  It  was  further 
developed  by  Kant. 

2.    The  Historical  Proof  or  ArgUxMentum  e  Consensu 

Gentium. 

This  proof  stands  in  close  relationship  with  the  preceding 
one.  It  may,  however,  be  counted  one  of  the  chief  proofs, 
inasmuch  as  it  sets  forth  the  thought,  not  of  individuals, 
but  of  whole  peoples.  The  idea  of  God  is  found  among  all 
peoples.  Every  people  has  some  form  of  worship.  Objec- 
tions have  also  been  made  against  this  proof,  but  the  his- 


THE   EXISTEXCK    OF   GOD.  25 

torical  truth  of  the  universality  of  the  idea  of  God  cannot 
be  gainsaid. 

This  proof  was  set  forth  by  Cicero  and  was  often  used 
by  the  Church  Fathers,  such  as  Clement  of  Alexandria. 
Cyprian  and  others. 

3.    The  Cosmological  Proof  or  Argumentum  a  Contin- 
GENTiA  Mundi. 

The  world  is  not  self-caused.  An  absolute  personality 
must  exist  who  has  caused  it.  We  cannot  go  back  inter- 
minably from  cause  to  cause  without  finally  reaching  the 
first,  from  which  all  things  proceed  and  which  in  itself  is 
uncaused  by  anyone  or  anything.  The  first  cause  could  not 
have  been  a  primitive  cell,  since  the  first  organism  could 
not  have  been  self -produced.  The  world  must  therefore  be 
an  ens  contingens  and  created  by  God. 

This  proof  was  suggested  by  Plato  and  Aristotle.  Augus- 
tine says  in  his  Confessiones,  X,  Chapter  VI,  9 :  "And  what 
is  this?  I  asked  the  earth  and  it  answered,  I  am  not  he, 
and  all  that  is  therein  gave  the  same  answer.  I  asked  the 
sea  and  the  deep  and  all  creeping  things,  and  they  answered, 
We  are  not  thy  God ;  look  higher  than  us.  I  asked  the  sun, 
the  moon  and  the  stars.  Neither  are  we  the  God  whom  thou 
seekest.  And  then  I  made  answer  to  all  these  things  round 
about  me :  Ye  have  told  me  concerning  my  God  that  ye  are 
not  He.  Tell  me  something  about  Him !  and  with  a  loud 
voice  they  answered :  He  made  us." 

Thomas  Aquinas  presented  the  proof  in  three  forms: 
a)  According  to  Aristotle,  from  the  motion  in  the  world 
to  a  primary  cause  which  is  not  moved  by  anything,  causa 
eflSciens  prima;  b)  according  to  DiODORUS  of  Tarsus  and 
John  of  Damascus,  from  the  unchangeableness  of  the 
world  to  the  unchangeable  being  who  is  the  cause  of  all 
change:  c)  according  to  Richard  of  St.  Victor,  from  the 
accidental  nature  of  the  world  to  a  necessary  being  who  is 
per  se  necessarium. 

Among  the  objections  that  have  been  raised  against  this 
proof  we  mention  those  of  Kant.     He  says  that  man  sees 


26  THEOLOGY, 

the  world  as  it  appears  and  not  as  it  really  is.  The  acci- 
dental nature  of  the  world  cannot  be  proved.  Against  this 
it  may  be  urged  that  Kant  misunderstood  the  relationship 
between  spirit  and  nature.  He  should  have  proved  first 
that  the  world  appears  different  from  what  it  is.  Hume 
states  that  there  is  no  analogy  to  the  assertion  that  all  things 
are  caused  by  a  cause  outside  the  world.  Hegel,  who 
changes  the  causal  relationship  between  God  and  the  world 
into  a  state  of  substantiality,  says  that  that  which  is  tem- 
poral is  mere  appearance,  simply  external  changing  forms, 
but  the  substance  of  the  world  is  unchangeable  in  all  change. 
This  pantheistic  objection  is  contradicted  by  the  con- 
sciousness of  man,  which  declares  that  the  world  is  not 
determined  by  a  world  soul  or  by  impersonal  substance. 

4.    The  Teleological  Proof. 

Design  or  purpose  in  the  world  points  to  an  absolutely 
wise  personality.  This  is  an  a  posteriori  argument.  Purpose 
is  causa  finalis.  Compare  Janet's  splendid  work  on  Final 
Causes.  Every  effect  must  have  an  adequate  cause,  and 
where  purpose  is  evident  this  cause  must  likewise  be  intel- 
ligent. We  cannot  describe  or  comprehend  a  piece  of  ma- 
chinery save  as  we  know  its  use  and  purpose.  The  teleo- 
logical proof  is  one  of  the  oldest,  best  and  most  convincing 
proofs  of  the  existence  of  God. 

The  argument  is  presented  in  two  forms  :  a)  The  physico- 
theological,  when  design  in  nature  is  considered;  b)  the 
historical  theological,  when  plan  and  purpose  in  the  history 
of  the  world  are  considered. 

Among  those  who  have  presented  this  proof  in  one  form 
or  another  the  following  may  be  mentioned.  Anaxagoras 
stated  that  the  guiding  hand  in  the  world  was  I'or?.  SOC- 
RATES asked  if  this  world  could  be  kept  in  order  by  some- 
thing which  lacked  understanding.  Aristotle  said  that 
neither  the  Divine  Being  nor  nature  did  anything  in  vain. 
Theophilus  of  Antioch  set  forth  the  figure  of  a  ship  and 
a  helmsman.  When  we  see  the  ship  sailing  along  we  con- 
clude that  there  is  a  helmsman  aboard.     MiNUClUS  Felix 


THE   EXIf^TENCK    OF    GO».  27 

pointed  to  the  heavens  and  said  that  a  being  with  the  highest 
understanding  must  have  set  all  in  order.  Athanasius 
remarks  concerning  the  statues  of  Phidias  that  by  viewing 
their  form  one  could  recognize  the  sculptor,  and  adds,  "How 
much  more  certain  must  one  not  be,  in  viewing  the  heavens, 
that  all  these  wonders  have  not  arranged  themselves,  but 
are  the  work  of  a  Creator."  This  proof  occurs  in  one  form 
or  another  in  many  other  writers  down  to  the  time  of 
Melanchthon,  after  which  it  was  abandoned  for  a  con- 
siderable period  until  the  representatives  of  the  Wolffian 
philosophy  and  the  advocates  of  natural  theology  exerted 
their  influence. 

Many  objections  have  been  raised  against  this  proof. 
Bacon  of  Verulam  rejected  causa  finalis  and  set  forth  in- 
stead causae  efficientes  or  the  genetic  method,  Hume  and 
Kant  say  that  we  know  the  world  in  very  small  part.  We 
cannot  have  faith  in  an  absolutely  perfect  being  because 
the  creator  cannot  be  more  perfect  than  his  work.  It  is  not 
certain  that  there  is  design  in  the  world,  however  much  it 
may  so  appear.  Hegel  says  that  this  proof  leads  to  the 
idea  of  a  world  soul.  The  Materialists  say  that  the  world 
is  not  a  finished  piece  of  work,  but  a  workshop  which  pro- 
duces its  own  tools.  MOLESCHOTT  says  that  the  will  is  con- 
ditioned by  external  influences  and  that  the  thinking  man 
is  the  sum  of  his  sensual  experience,  or  the  sum  of  parents, 
time,  space,  atmosphere,  sound,  light,  food  and  clothes. 
However,  the  Materialists  have  not  proved  their  assertions. 
They  have  not  proved  that  the  principle  of  life  is  a  modi- 
fication of  matter  and  as  such  the  formative  principle. 
Neither  have  they  proved  that  the  soul  is  a  product  of  mat- 
ter, nor  that  ideas  are  inductively  derived  from  the  same 
source.  Even  if  the  Darwinians  could  prove  their  doctrine 
of  the  original  cell,  this  would  still  not  be  a  proof  that  God 
does  not  exist.  Rightly  considered,  evolution  implies  a  won- 
derful teleology  that  points  to  an  intelligent  cause.  The 
teleological  proof  is  incontestably  one  of  the  best  natural 
proofs  of  the  existence  of  God. 


28  TirEoi.ooY. 

^2.    NATURAL  REVELATION. 

The  question  of  revelation  and  therefore  also  natural 
revelation  is  closely  connected  with  the  proofs  of  God's  ex- 
istence. If  a  God  exists,  He  must  reveal  Himself  in  some 
way.  Revelation  means  to  be  revealed  and  to  reveal.  God 
has  actively  revealed  Himself  in  a  general  and  special  sense. 
In  that  way  His  existence  has  been  proved.  This  reasoning 
may  indeed  be  in  a  circle,  but  it  is  nevertheless  true. 
Tholuck  says:  "Reasoning  in  a  circle  is  not  forbidden  in 
the  realm  of  truth.  Is  not  every  logical  proof  to  a  certain 
extent  based  on  this  reasoning?  If  the  final  conclusions 
were  not  found  in  the  premises,  how  could  it  ever  be  de- 
rived therefrom?" 

Revelatio  generalis,  or  General  Revelation,  is  that  nat- 
ural revelation  of  God  through  ivhich  He  reveals  Himself 
in  the  conscience  of  man,  in  the  kingdom  of  nature,  and  in 
history. 

The  invisible  God  reveals  Himself  in  His  works  which 
reflect  His  attributes.  But  we  could  not  know  this,  did  He 
not  reveal  Himself  in  us.  But  God  is  also  a  living  God  who 
rules  and  therefore  reveals  Himself  in  the  events  of  history. 
Someone  has  said  that  creation  and  history  both  conceal  and 
reveal  God.  Creation  and  history  are  books  written  with 
consonants  as  the  Hebrew  Bible,  while  man  in  hearkening 
to  the  voice  of  conscience  and  reason  supplies  the  vowel 
signs. 

There  is  therefore  a  natural  knowledge  of  God,  cognitio 
Dei  naturalis,  which  is  partly  insita,  partly  acquisita. 

a.  Cognitio  insita  or  innata,  which  is  also  called  con- 
stitutional or  subjective,  is  the  general  conception  of  God 
which  is  found  in  the  heart  of  every  man  as  a  remyiant  of 
the  divine  image. 

To  this  so-called  scintillula  notitise  belongs  the  conscience, 
which  in  the  first  place  is  the  voice  of  God  in  man,  but  also 
the  voice  of  our  deepest  nature.  The  concept  of  conscience 
is  expressed  in  the  very  name.  Compare  the  expressions 
for  conscience  used  in  different  languages.    From  the  legis- 


NATURAL   REVELATION.  29 

lative  point  of  view  conscience  is  called  conscientia  antece- 
dens;  as  a  witness  of  special  acts,  conscientia  concomitans; 
from  the  critical  viewpoint,  conscientia  subsequens. 

QUENSTEDT  presents  the  following  proofs  of  the  existence 
of  this  cognitio  insita :  1)  The  inherited  distinction  between 
good  and  evil;  2)  the  fear  of  the  Supreme  Divinity  whicn 
is  natural  to  all  men;  3)  terror  of  an  evil  conscience  ana 
the  securitj^  of  a  good  conscience;  4)  the  anguish  of  con- 
science when  a  crime  has  been  committed;  5)  the  common 
testimony  of  all  peoples;  6)  the  natural  inclination  to  some 
form  of  religion;  7)  moral  laws  produced  by  natural  re- 
ligion. 

In  the  early  days  of  the  Church  natural  religion  and  the 
knowledge  of  God  derived  therefrom  were  also  set  forth. 
Compare  the  doctrine  of  Adyo?  o-Tre/j/xaTtKo?.  Justin  Martyr 
says  in  Apol.,  II :  "Every  man  spoke  in  accordance  with  the 
measure  of  the  Aoyo?  o-Trep/xariKo's  (the  word  planted  among 
men),  which  he  had  received.  Clement  of  Alexandria 
expresses  himself  as  follows  in  Stromata,  I,  Chapter  vii : 
'The  husbandman  among  men  is  only  one,  viz.,  He  who 
causes  the  rain  to  fall  at  all  times,  the  Lord,  the  Word.  The 
times  and  the  places,  which  were  the  recipients,  brought 
about  the  differences  that  occur."  Tertullian  in  his  XVII 
Apol.  says :  "Although  burdened  under  the  slavery  of  the 
body,  although  led  astray  by  harmful  habits,  although  weak- 
ened by  passion,  although  under  the  dominion  of  false  gods, 
yet  whenever  the  soul  comes  to  itself  out  of  a  condition  of 
debauchery,  or  of  sleep,  or  of  sickness,  and  regains  some- 
thing of  its  natural  health,  it  speaks  of  God,  using  no  other 
expression,  because  this  is  the  name  of  the  only  true  God. 
'God  is  great  and  good;  may  God  grant  it,'  are  expressions 
upon  every  tongue.  It  also  bears  witness  that  God  is  the 
judge.  God  sees !  O  beautiful  testimony  of  the  soul,  which 
is  naturally  Christian!  And  when  it  makes  use  of  these 
words  it  looks  not  up  to  the  Capitoline  Hill,  but  to  heaven." 
Arnobius,  C.  Gent.  33:  "Is  there  a  human  being  that  has 
not  begun  the  first  day  of  his  life  with  the  thought  (as 
idea)  of  the  great  head?    In  whom  has  it  not  been  implanted 


;U)  TnEOLOGV. 

by  nature,  imprinted  and  impressed  almost  from  the  moth- 
er's womb,  in  whom  is  it  not  an  inherited  instinct,  that  He 
is  King-,  Lord  and  Regent  of  all  that  exists?" 

b.  CoGNiTio  ACQUisiTA,  which  is  also  called  objective,  is 
gained  by  considering  the  ivorks  and  activity  of  God  in  the 
kingdom  of  nature  and  in  history. 

Gerhard  sets  forth  the  following  points  among  others: 
1)  The  variety,  beauty  and  order  of  nature;  2)  the  main- 
tenance and  government  of  creation;  3)  the  rich  gifts  that 
satisfy  the  wants  of  all  creatures;  4)  the  divine  retribu- 
tion; 5)  the  miracles;  6)  the  prophecies ;  7)  the  periodical 
destruction  of  earthly  kingdoms;  S)  the  series  of  causae 
efficientes  and  causae  finales. 

This  cognition,  although  imperfect  and  weak,  is  never- 
theless true,  since  Paul  calls  it  truth.  Cf .  Rom.  1 :  18ff. 
However,  we  must  distinguish  between  this  knowledge  be- 
fore and  after  the  Fall.  After  the  Fall  it  has  been  falsified 
and  made  imperfect,  containing  only  a  partial  knowledge 
of  God,  His  power,  wisdom  and  providence.  This  knowledge 
is  insufficient  for  salvation. 

The  natural  revelation  of  God  has,  however,  a  threefold 
usefulness,  as  pointed  out  by  Calovius:  1)  Utilitas  pxdw- 
gogica,  so  that  man  seeks  true  knowledge;  2)  utilitas  pse- 
deutica,  which  leads  to  moral  and  general  education  both 
within  and  without  the  Church;  3)  utilitas  didactica,  be- 
cause natural  revelation  can  shed  light  upon  the  supernat- 
ural revelation. 

§3.     THE   SUPERNATURAL  REVELATION. 

Revelatio  specialis,  or  the  Special  Revelation,  is  that 
external  act  of  God  by  which  He  re  reals  Himself  to  man 
through  the  Logos,  the  personal  Word,  and  through  the 
Holy  Scriptures,  so  that  all  men  may  receive  saving  knoivl- 
edge  of  Him. 

This  revelation  is  divided  as  follows:  a.  immediata  or 
direct,  b.  mediata  or  indirect. 

HOLLAZIUS  presents   the   following  modi   for  the   direct 


SUPERNATURAL    REVELATION.  31 

revelation:  1)  By  the  hearing  of  an  articulated  voice,  2) 
through  sleep,  3)  through  ecstasy,  4)  through  urim  and 
thummim,   5)  through  an  inspiration,    6)  through  the  Son. 

1.    The  Possibility  of  a  Supernatural  Revelation. 

Although  it  is  evident  since  God  exists  that  He  can  also 
reveal  Himself,  still  the  following  points  may  be  considered : 
1)  On  the  divine  side  there  can  be  no  obstacles,  since  God 
is  able  to  do  what  He  wills;  2)  there  is  nothing  to  hinder 
such  a  revelation  in  the  laws  of  nature,  since  God  is  the 
ruler  of  these  laws;  3)  on  the  human  side  there  are  no 
obstacles,  because  man  is  able  to  receive,  know  and  examine 
such  a  revelation;  4)  it  cannot  be  proved  that  the  truths  of 
reason  are  violated  by  the  special  revelation. 

The  objections  to  the  possibility  of  the  supernatural  reve- 
lation come  principally  from  the  Deists  and  the  Pantheists. 

The  Deists  object:  a.  That  God  after  creation  has  with- 
drawn Himself  from  the  world  and  left  it  to  develop  accord- 
ing to  the  laws  of  nature.  A  special  revelation  would 
disturb  this  order.  While  the  Deists  have  not  proved  their 
contention,  still  it  may  be  said  that  God  never  ceases  to 
work.  All  nature  is  permeated  by  spiritual  power  and  God 
is  ever  active  in  sustaining  the  universe  in  never-ceasing 
creational  activity.  The  laws  of  nature  do  not  develop  from 
blind  necessity,  but  are  God's  way  of  working. 

b.  The  special  revelation,  if  actual,  would  be  a  post  fac- 
tum activity  and  designed  to  improve  the  perfect  creation 
of  God,  which  would  be  unworthy  of  Him.  In  dealing  with 
these  and  other  objections  we  must  consider  the  freedom 
of  man  and  the  disturbing  influence  of  sin. 

The  Pantheists  object:  a.  That  a  special  revelation  would 
militate  against  the  immutability  of  God.  But  this  immu- 
tability must  not  be  considered  as  a  cold  and  petrified  im- 
mobility. 

b.  God  and  the  world  are  one.  Therefore  if  anything 
intervenes  in  nature  that  would  militate  against  the  laws 
of  nature  there  arises  a  conflict  with  the  divine  essence. 


32  TIIKOI.OCY. 

Clearly  a  world  substance  of  this  sort  is  no  God.  Pantheism 
cannot  accept  any  other  revelation  than  the  manifestation 
of  the  absolute  substance  in  nature  and  man. 

2.    The  Necessity  of  a  Supernatural  Revelation. 

The  necessity  of  a  special  revelation  was  recognized  even 
by  the  heathens,  such  as  Plato.  The  history  of  religion 
clearly  demonstrates  this  necessity.  The  founder  of  every 
religion  has  claimed  a  special  revelation.  The  history  of 
philosophy  itself  reveals  the  need  of  a  special  revelation 
when  we  consider  the  contradictions  and  conflicts  that  have 
arisen  on  all  the  most  important  subjects. 

The  necessity  of  a  special  revelation  is  grounded  in  the 
need  of  salvation,  the  occasion  for  it  being  the  Fall  into  sin. 
This  revelation  was  accidental  on  the  ground  of  sin  as  a 
presupposition,  but  it  was  not  accidental  in  the  sense  that 
it  could  have  been  inhibited  after  sin  had  entered  the  world. 
Revelation  was  necessary  from  the  divine  viewpoint  in 
order  that  the  design  and  purpose  of  creation  and  salvation 
might  be  realized.  Revelation  was  necessary  for  man  be- 
cause he  was  powerless  to  save  himself  from  the  power  and 
condemnation  of  sin. 

3.    The  Reality  of  Revelation. 

The  Christian  Church  is  now  in  the  world  and  Christi- 
anity is  the  dominating  religion.  The  historical  reality  of 
Christ,  His  words  and  deeds,  the  testimony  of  the  Apostles, 
the  miracles,  the  fulfilment  of  prophecy,  the  content  of  the 
Holy  Scriptures  and  the  fruits  of  Christianity  prove  incon- 
trovertibly  the  reality  of  revelation. 

4.    The  Relation  between  Reason  and  Revelation. 

Reason  has  been  defined  in  many  ways,  but  we  may  say 
that  reason  consists  in  our  power  to  comprehend  necessary 
truths,  while  understanding  is  the  ability  to  judge  and  draw 
conclusions.  We  may  also  say  that  reason  sets  forth  the 
principles  that  are  revealed  by  the  light  of  nature  and  the 
conclusions  that  are  based  on  these  principles.     They  are 


SUPEKNATX'RAL    KEVEI.ATION.  33 

divided  as  follows:  1)  Organic,  which  belong  to  the  medi- 
ating disciplines,  such  as  grammar,  logic,  etc.;  2)  philo- 
sophical: a,  absolutely  and  unrestrictedly  universal,  which 
cannot  be  controverted  by  any  argument,  not  even  by  Scrip- 
ture, e.  g.,  it  is  impossible  for  a  thing  to  be  and  not  to  be 
at  the  same  time ;  b.  restrictedlij  universal,  which  are  true 
to  a  certain  extent,  i.  e.,  as  far  as  human  knowledge  goes, 
but  they  are  limited  and  may  be  invalidated  through  proof, 
e.  g,,  the  number  of  essences  is  the  same  as  the  number  of 
persons.  This  assertion  does  not  hold  in  the  doctrine  of  the 
Trinity, 

Concerning  the  use  of  the  reason  Hollazius  says :  "Rea- 
son is  not  the  leader  but  the  follower  of  theology.  Hagar 
acts  as  the  handmaid  of  her  mistress,  but  does  not  com- 
mand; when  she  seeks  to  command,  she  is  driven  from  the 
sanctuary  of  the  home."  In  theology  reason  is  acknowl- 
edged as  possessing  organic  and  instrumental  power,  iisus 
organicus  et  instrumentalis ,  but  not  a  normal  or  material 
influence,  non  nsus  principiorum  philosophicorum  normalis. 

Concerning  the  function  of  reason  in  theology  the  follow- 
ing division  may  be  observed:  1)  usus  organicus,  which 
sets  forth  the  assistance  rendered  by  grammar,  logic,  etc. 
in  the  work  of  exegesis;  2)  usus  catascevasticus  or  edifica- 
tivus,  which  is  the  power  of  the  sanctified  reason  to  set 
forth  the  content  of  faith  for  edification.  There  is  a  natural 
knowledge  of  God,  but  it  must  always  be  subordinated  to 
the  revealed  knowledge.  When  these  two  forms  of  knowl- 
edge do  not  appear  to  agree,  the  former  must  yield  to  the 
latter;  when,  however,  they  do  agree,  the  latter  strengthens 
the  former;  3)  usus  anascevasticus  or  destructivus  is  the 
power  of  the  reason  to  defeat  error.  In  the  first  place  Holy 
Scripture  must  supply  the  arguments,  but  in  the  second 
place  philosophical  arguments  may  be  employed. 

Of  course  we  must  distinguish  between  reason  per  se 
before  the  Fall  and  reason  such  as  it  is  now,  as  well  as 
between  unregenerated  and  regenerated  reason.  The  doc- 
trines of  faith  are  supra  rationem  and  in  reality  contra 
rationem   corruptam.     We  must  likewise   distinguish   be- 


34  THEOLOGY. 

tween  the  diverse  character  of  the  fields  of  the  natural 
and  the  supernatural.  In  this  manner  an  apparent  con- 
tradiction will  be  avoided.  For  example,  Gerhard  and 
with  him  others  set  forth  the  following:  When  the  philoso- 
pher says  ex  nihilo  nihil  fieri,  sc.  per  modum  generationis, 
he  does  not  contradict  the  theologian  who  teaches  per  modum 
creationis  aliquid  fieri  ex  nihilo.  In  the  same  manner  when 
the  philosopher  says  that  the  virgin  Mary  could  not  give 
birth  to  a  child  and  still  remain  a  virgin,  he  does  not  contra- 
dict the  theologian  who  says  that  it  took  place  in  a  super- 
natural manner.  A  Christian  and  true  philosophy  does  not 
conflict  with  theology,  because  their  fields  are  different. 

§  4.     CONCERNING  THE  BEING  OF  GOD. 
1.    The  Definition  or  Conception  of  God. 

A  true  theological  knowledge  cannot  be  obtained  except 
through  special  revelation.  Theology  must  be  studied  in  the 
light  of  Christology.  For  this  reason  our  Lord  says  in  His 
high-priestly  intercessory  prayer :  "This  is  life  eternal, 
that  they  should  know  thee  the  only  true  God,  and  him 
whom  thou  didst  send,  even  Jesus  Christ."  In  Matth.  11: 
27  He  says:  "No  one  knoweth  the  Son,  save  the  Father; 
neither  doth  any  know  the  Father,  save  the  Son,  and  he  to 
whomsoever  the  Son  willeth  to  reveal  him."  God  cannot 
be  defined  in  an  adequate  manner.  We  can  only  obtain  an 
aliqua  descriptio,  a  definitio  Dei  yioyninalis.  In  Isa.  40 :  18 
we  read :  "To  whom  then  will  ye  liken  God?  or  what  likeness 
will  ye  compare  unto  him?" 

Gerhard  says :  "We  are  certainly  able  to  know  God,  but 
not  to  comprehend  Him,  i.  e.,  we  cannot  know  Him  com- 
pletely, for  He  is  infinite."  Quenstedt  defines  God  as 
essentia  spiritvalis  infinita  and  Hollazius  as  spirit  us  inde- 
pendens.  Some  of  the  modern  theologians  define  God  as 
the  ahsolutclu  harmonious  life.  Granfelt  says,  God  is  per- 
sonal, holy  love.  The  more  recent  orthodox  theologians  in 
Germany  and  BjÖrling  in  Sweden  emphasize  the  concep- 
tion of  absolute  personality.     There  is  no  doubt  that  the 


THE  BEING  OF  GOD.  35 

best  definition  is  to  be  obtained  by  considering  God  as  the 
absolute  personality.  God  is  not  an  absolute  undetermined 
substance,  according-  to  Spinoza,  rather  He  is  a  personality 
who  in  Himself  lives  the  life  of  everlasting  love. 

2.    The  Divine  Being  Defined  and  the  Conception  of 
THE  Absolute  Personality. 

We  may  say  that  the  being  of  God  consists  of  two  parts : 
a)  the  formal,  or  that  God  is  self-conscious  and  self-deter- 
mining; b)  the  material,  or  that  God  is  love.  The  parts 
are  therefore  being,  self-consciousness  or  thought,  and  self- 
determination  or  will,  united  in  love,  which  is  the  qualita- 
tive factor.  These  parts  abide  in  and  through  each  other 
and  are  therefore  equally  primitive.  The  being  cannot  pre- 
cede the  knowing  and  the  willing,  for  that  would  result  in 
substance  that  is  without  consciousness  or  will.  The  know- 
ing could  not  precede  the  being  and  the  willing,  for  then 
God  would  become  an  empty  form  or  idea  without  any  cor- 
responding reality.  The  willing  could  not  precede  the  being 
and  the  knowing,  for  this  would  result  in  blind  power.  As 
an  absolute  personality  God  is  therefore  a  unity,  a  union  in 
love  of  being,  thought  and  will.  God  is  therefore  one,  for 
which  reason  we  can  say  that  true  Theism  is  Monotheism. 
But  Monotheism  in  no  wise  conflicts  with  the  doctrine  of 
the  Trinity,  but  is  rather  explained  by  it,  because  as  triune 
God  is  absolute  personality  both  from  the  formal  and  the 
material  point  of  view. 

The  unity  of  God  comprises  two  parts:  a)  the  inteyisive, 
by  which  God  in  His  position  of  eternal  independence  is  the 
union  of  all  attributes  of  His  being,  which  is  called  the 
qualitative  unity;  b)  the  exclusive,  in  accordance  with 
which  God  is  all  that  He  is  only  by  and  through  Himself, 
which  is  called  the  numerical  unity.  In  accordance  with 
the  first  part  God  is  perfect  by  reason  of  the  harmony  be- 
tween the  being,  the  knowing  and  the  willing.  The  will 
agrees  with  the  being  so  that  God  is  power;  the  thought 
agrees  with  the  being  so  that  God  is  truth;  the  will  agrees 
with  the  absolute  good  so  that  God  is  the  Holy  One ;  the 


36  TIIKOI.OCiV. 

thought  agrees  with  the  absolute  good  so  that  God  is  wis- 
dom. By  reason  of  the  second  part  God  is  self-sufficient, 
which  constitutes  His  autarchy. 

The  harmony  of  the  divine  attributes  in  the  unity  of  love 
from  the  internal  point  of  view  constitutes  His  blessedness 
and  from  the  external  point  of  view  His  majesty. 

The  conception  of  the  absolute  personality  which  ex- 
presses His  being  is  set  forth  bj^  Dogmaticians  in  the  fol- 
lowing manner :  God  is  a  unity  in  love  of  being,  knowing  and 
tvilling,  ayid  by  reason  of  this  unity  He  is  the  perfect,  self- 
sufficient  ayid  blessed  majesty. 

In  the  Holy  Scriptures  the  names  of  God  express  His 
being.  The  word  "countenance"  is  also  used  to  express 
God's  being,  as  in  the  following  passage :  "I  shall  behold 
thy  face  in  righteousness ;  I  shall  be  satisfied,  when  I  awake, 
with  beholding  thy  form."  The  attributes  of  God's  essence 
are  set  forth  in  their  relation  to  the  world,  but  in  this 
connection  the  following  passages  may  be  quoted:  "God  is 
one"  (Romans  3:  30)  ;  "There  is  no  God  but  one"  (1  Cor. 
8:4);  "One  God  and  Father  of  all"  (Eph.  4:6);  "For 
there  is  one  God"  (1  Tim.  2:5);  "Your  Father  which  is  in 
heaven  is  perfect"  (Matt.  5:  48);  "Neither  is  he  served 
by  men's  hands,  as  though  he  needed  anything"  (Acts  17 : 
25)  ;  "For  as  the  Father  hath  life  in  himself,  even  so  gave 
he  to  the  Son  also  to  have  life  in  himself"  (John  5:  26). 
In  1  Tim.  6:  15  God  is  called  the  blessed  and  only  Potentate. 
In  addition  many  passages  could  be  quoted  that  describe 
the  being,  knowing  and  willing  of  God,  and  also  that  He 
is  love. 

John  4:  24  'Vver/xu  6  öeds"  is  a  most  wonderful  and  re- 
markable definition  of  God.  The  omission  of  the  article 
does  not  make  the  expression  indefinite,  but  is  the  most 
definite  and  emphatic  way  of  saying  that  God  is  the  Spirit 
in  the  absolute  sense.  Spirit  stands  first  in  the  original, 
and,  therefore,  occupies  the  most  emphatic  place,  literally 
translated:  "Spirit  is  God."  He  is  not  a  spirit,  but  spirit 
in  the  fullest  and  highest  sense.  The  only  corresponding 
dogmatic  expression  is,   God  is  the  Absolute  Personality. 


THE   RRING   OF   GOD.  37 

We  human  beings,  although  created  in  the  image  of  God, 
cannot  comprehend  the  infinite  Spirit,  Man  knows  partly 
his  own  spirit  through  his  self -consciousness,  but  the  Spirit 
of  God  man  knows  only  by  analogy.  A  divine  self -conscious- 
ness is  necessary  to  know  the  essence  of  God.  Compare 
Matt.  11:  27,  where  it  is  stated  that  only  the  Father  knows 
the  Son  and  the  Son  the  Father.  And  when  the  Son  re- 
vealeth  the  Father  to  the  believers,  the  knowledge  imparted 
is  only  relative. 

When  God  is  defined  as  absolute  spirit  and  incorporeal, 
we  should  not  look  upon  the  divine  Spirit  as  unreal.  The 
spiritual  essence  of  God  is  the  most  real  substance.  God 
as  Spirit  is  more  real  than  any  phenomenon.  The  Spirit  of 
God  is  more  real  than  the  soul  or  spirit  of  man,  and  the  soul 
of  man  is  more  real  than  his  body.  The  soul  is  not  exposed 
to  changes  like  the  body,  and  at  death  the  soul  remains  a 
spiritual  entity  just  as  real  as  before  death.  It  is  easier  to 
think  of  the  soul  as  intact  after  death  than  the  body,  because 
we  know  how  the  body  dissolves.  The  reason,  will  and 
feeling  occupy  no  space,  but  are  nevertheless  real.  The  soul, 
although  naturally  penetrating  every  part  of  the  body,  as 
an  entity  occupies  no  space.  The  forces  or  laws  of  nature, 
such  as  gravity,  are  invisible.  The  fact  that  a  thing  is 
invisible  does  not  make  it  unreal.  We  do  not  see  the  soul, 
but  we  feel  that  the  spiritual  in  us  is  our  real  being.  God 
is  just  as  real  without  a  body  as  if  He  had  one.  God  has 
no  eyes  and  ears  as  we  have,  but  it  is  self-evident  that  He 
sees  and  hears.  Compare  Ps.  94 :  9.  God  makes  an  impres- 
sion on  the  human  soul  as  really  as  matter  does  upon  the 
human  body.  Compare  Ps.  77 :  3 :  ''I  remember  God  and 
am  disquieted."  Although  God  has  no  body  nor  bodily 
organs,  He  still  can  manifest  Himself.  And  the  Son  of  God 
as  incarnated  has  a  body  and  will  appear  as  the  God-man 
with  a  glorified  body  in  all  eternity.  Philip  wanted  to  see 
the  Father.  He  said  to  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ :  "Lord,  show 
us  the  Father,  and  it  sufiiceth  us.  Jesus  saith  unto  him, 
Have  I  been  so  long  time  with  you,  and  dost  thou  not  know 
me,  Philip?  he  that  hath  seen  me  hath  seen  the  Father." 


38  TIIKOLOGY. 

Philip  desired  to  see  a  bodily  manifestation  just  as  he  saw 
the  Lord  Jesus.  The  disciples  did  not  understand  that  in 
knowing-  the  character  of  Jesus  Christ  they  also  knew  the 
character  of  the  Father,  They  did  not  then  realize  that  the 
divine  essence  is  one  that  exists  in  three  relative  persons. 
Christ  did  not  at  that  time  explain  that  the  hypostasis  of 
the  Father,  as  it  is  in  reality,  could  not  be  seen  with  bodily 
eyes.  We  do  not  even  see  one  another  except  in  the  picture 
form.  The  outward  appearance  is  not  the  most  important ; 
the  soul  and  character  are  essential.  The  Father  has  re- 
vealed Himself  by  means  of  many  manifestations.  Some  of 
the  disciples  had  heard  His  voice,  as  on  the  mount  of  trans- 
figuration.   The  Holy  Spirit  also  had  revealed  Himself. 

God  as  absolute  Spirit  in  the  highest  sense  is  also  the 
absolute  Personality.  Personality  implies  self-conscious- 
ness and  self-determination.  Self-consciousness  is  the 
power  which  a  rational  being  possesses  of  making  itself  the 
object  of  its  own  thought  and  of  knowing  that  it  has  done 
so,  and,  therefore,  it  also  knows  the  identity  of  subject  and 
object.  We  must  clearly  discriminate  between  conscious- 
ness and  self-consciousness.  In  consciousness  the  object  is 
something  different  from  the  subject.  An  animal  is  con- 
scious of  another  object,  but  never  duplicates  its  own  unity 
and  contemplates  itself.  The  animal  has  many  experiences, 
but  cannot  refer  them  back  to  itself  as  a  person  can.  There 
is  no  self-knowledge  in  an  animal.  Man  is  both  conscious 
and  self-conscious.  But  God  is  not  first  conscious  and  then 
self-conscious.  God  is  eternally  self-conscious.  In  the  doc- 
trine of  the  Trinity  it  is  self-evident  that  the  divine  self- 
consciousness  is  trinal.  But  there  are  not  three  independent 
self-conscious  persons.  God  is  one,  and  there  can  be  but 
one  divine  essence.  Three  separate  and  independent  divine 
essences  would  be  an  axiomatic  contradiction,  because  none 
of  them  would  be  absolute,  and  as  a  consequence  none  could 
be  God  or  Absolute  Personality.  The  doctrine  of  the  divine 
unity  was  as  important  to  the  Israelites  and  Jews  of  old  as 
the  doctrines  of  the  resurrection  of  Christ  and  justification 
by  faith  to  the  Christians.    When  the  Old  Testament  people 


THK   HEIAG   OF   GOD.  39 

emigrated  from  Egypt  their  motto  was :  "Hear,  O  Israel : 
Jehovah  our  God  is  one  Jehovah."  If  they  did  not  fully 
understand  the  trinal  unity,  they  were  ready  to  die  for  the 
doctrine  that  God  is  one.  God  is  one  God  and  the  only  God. 
The  unity  of  God  is  unique.  God  is  not  a  unit,  but  a  unity 
implying  distinctions.  God  is  blessed  forever  independently 
of  the  universe.  His  majesty  is  manifested  to  the  rational 
beings.  God  was  blessed  before  creation,  being  eternally 
blessed.  As  the  material  element  of  the  conception  of  God 
as  the  absolute  personality  is  His  love  within  Himself  inde- 
pendent of  creation,  it  is  plain  that  His  blessedness  belongs 
to  His  very  nature,  but  on  account  of  His  love  He  created 
rational  angels  and  man  and  also  created  for  them  a  uni- 
verse suitable  to  their  condition. 

But  God  is  not  a  part  of  the  universe  and  the  universe 
is  not  a  part  of  God.  The  All  is  not  the  infinite  God.  The 
Infinite  and  the  universe  are  wholly  diverse.  God  as  infinite 
cannot  be  finite,  and  He  is  not  limited  by  the  finite  world 
which  He  created  according  to  His  wisdom.  The  simplicity, 
spirituality  and  immutability  of  God  also  preclude  the 
thought  that  God  in  His  immanence  is  extended.  When  we 
say  that  God  is  the  Absolute  as  a  real  person,  we  also  reject 
such  views  as  the  following:  God  is  an  absolute  idea,  a 
universal  mind,  a  world-soul,  a  moral  order  of  the  universe, 
etc. 

3.    Anti-Theistic  Theories. 

a.  Pantheism.  By  this  is  meant  the  view  that  God  and 
nature  or  that  God  and  the  entire  universe  are  one  and  the 
same  substance.  All  things  temporal  are  considered  as 
modifications  or  parts  of  the  one  substance.  Pantheism 
therefore  implies  Monism  and  cannot  be  separated  from 
Determinism.  In  considering  the  question  of  God's  rela- 
tion to  the  world,  Pantheism  is  the  opposite  of  Deism. 
Pantheism  is  said  to  be  twofold:  1)  Acosmism,  or  the 
Oriental  Pantheism,  according  to  which  the  world  has  been 
entirely  merged  in  God.  In  this  class  are  counted  the 
Eleatics,  such  as  Xenophanes,  Parmenides  and  Zeno.    Par- 


40  TIIKOI.OOY. 

MENIDES  taught  that  being  is  not  an  abstract  unity,  but  the 
only  reality,  an  absolute  unity  and  the  only  one.  Being  is 
likewise  indivisible  and  unchangeable  with  neither  begin- 
ning nor  end.  He  also  stated  that  being  is  identical  with 
thought,  for  thought  must  be  being;  non-being  is  nothing. 
According  to  Parmenides  the  world  has  entirely  entered  into 
God  or  what  he  calls  being.  The  world  of  phenomena  is 
non-being  and  exists  only  in  the  thought  of  man;  2)  Athe- 
ism, or  the  Occidental  Pantheism,  by  which  God  is  merged 
in  the  world.  According  to  this  view  becoming  is  set  forth, 
but  not  being. 

Modern  Pantheism  began  with  Bruno,  who  was  a  fore- 
runner of  the  most  noted  of  all  Pantheists,  Spinoza.  His 
system  contained  the  ideas  substance,  attribute  and  mode. 
There  exists  only  one  substance.  This  substance  he  calls 
God.  All  separate  existences  are  merely  modifications  of 
the  substance.  He  considers  the  world  as  an  accident  of 
the  divine  substance.  The  substance  has  attributes,  each  of 
which  gives  expression  in  its  way  to  the  essence  of  the 
substance.  These  are  thought  and  extension.  God  is  think- 
ing substance  when  considered  from  that  point  of  view ;  He 
is  extended  substance  when  so  considered.  But  the  exten- 
sion of  the  divine  substance  does  not  imply  length  or  depth 
or  shape.  The  attributes  do  not  belong  to  the  substance,  for 
the  substance  excludes  all  determination.  Res  cogitans 
and  res  extensa  are  the  same  thing.  The  infinite  substance 
appears  in  finite  forms  or  modi  Avhich  are  like  the  waves 
of  the  sea.  Therefore  all  that  we  see,  yea,  the  entire  uni- 
verse, is  nothing  more  than  the  modes  of  the  attributes  or 
of  the  substance. 

Among  idealistic  Pantheists  may  be  mentioned  Fichte, 
Schelling  and  Hegel.  Fichte  represents  Subjective  Ideal- 
ism, the  identity  of  thought  and  being,  of  the  subjective 
and  the  objective  in  the  ego.  Things  as  to  their  substance 
are  not  found  outside  the  ego.  Schelling  represents  the 
Objective  Idealism,  the  identity  of  thought  and  being  even 
independent  of  the  ego.  What  Fichte  calls  the  highest  prin- 
ciple or  the  ego,  Schelling  calls  the  world  soul.    While  Fichte 


THE  BEING  OF  GOD.  41 

sets  forth  the  subjective  ego  as  the  principle  of  all  being 
and  knowing,  Schelling  endeavors  to  show  that  the  ob- 
jective non-ego  or  nature  could  just  as  well  be  set  forth  as 
the  principle  of  being  and  knowing.  Hegel  is  the  repre- 
sentative of  the  Absolute  Idealism ;  thought  is  the  source 
of  the  indwelling  concept  and  is  the  only  reality  and  truth. 
The  absolute  ego  realizes  itself  fn  the  non-ego.  Hegel's 
Pantheism  is  logical.  He  said  that  reason  is  the  organ  of 
philosophy.  The  absolute  is  the  result  which  the  reason 
reaches  through  the  exercise  of  dialectical  thinking  from 
undetermined  being.  According  to  Hegel  all  that  exists  is 
simply  the  revelation  of  God  in  the  exercise  of  thought. 
God  is  everything  and  nothing.  He  is  all  because  He  is  the 
only  substance  that  sustains  all  consciousness  and  every 
existing  thing.  He  is  nothing  because  He  is  conscious  of 
Himself  only  through  man.  Clearly  such  systems  conflict 
with  Christianity. 

b.  Materialism.  Materialism  says  that  matter  is  the 
only  substance,  from  which  everything  is  derived.  There 
is  therefore  no  spiritual  essence  either  in  the  universe  or 
in  man.  The  anti-theistic  theory  appears  in  so  many  varia- 
tions that  it  is  difficult  to  give  a  precise  definition.  Materi- 
alism may  be  divided  into  two  main  divisions:  1)  The  an- 
cient, which  is  represented  by  Democritus  and  Epicurus; 
2)  the  modern,  which  is  represented  by  Hobbes,  whose  ma- 
terialism, however,  was  not  complete,  La  Mettrie,  von  Hol- 
bach,  Darwin,  Herbert  Spencer,  Huxley  and  others.  The 
last  named  do  not  desire  to.  be  classed  as  Materialists,  but 
they  are  clearly  materialistic  philosophers  and  their  posi- 
tions are  anti-theistic. 

c.  Positivism.  This  designation  was  originated  by 
AUGUSTE  COMTE  who  may  be  said  to  be  the  foremost  cham- 
pion of  Positivism.  The  main  principles  of  Positivism  are 
not  new,  for  they  were  set  forth  in  ancient  times  by  Prota- 
goras and  in  modern  times  by  Hume  and  Kant.  Comte  has, 
however,  formulated  into  a  system  the  ideas  that  are  char- 
acteristic of  Positivism.  It  is  not  easy  to  define  Positivism, 
for  skeptical,  materialistic  and  general  atheistic  tendencies 


42  THEOLOGY. 

bear  the  name  of  Positivism.  Positivism  forms  a  link  be- 
tween Skepticism  and  Materialism.  Comte  says  that  we 
know  nothing-  but  physical  phenomena  and  their  laws.  He 
rejects  both  causa  efficiens  and  causa  finalis.  The  world 
phenomena  has  not  been  produced  by  any  supernatural 
cause.  Religion  in  the  ordinary  sense  was  not  needed  and 
is  considered  as  a  weakness.  The  religion  of  Positivism 
presented  as  objects  of  worship  the  earth,  the  universe  and 
humanity.  This  is  enough  to  show  the  anti-Theism  of 
Positivism. 

4.    Notes  on  the  History  of  Dogma. 

A.     Concerning  the  Comprehensihility  ayid  Nature  of  God. 

When  we  consider  the  development  of  the  dogma  during 
the  different  periods  we  find  that  most  thinkers  take 
the  position  that  God  cannot  be  understood  or  defined  in 
an  adequate  manner.  Among  those  who  took  another  view 
were  Arius  and  especially  Eunomius.  Duns  Scotus  held  the 
view  that  man  could  attain  essential  knowledge.  Dionysius 
the  Areopagite  and  John  Scotus  Erigena  were  both  influ- 
enced by  Pantheism,  as  were  also  Böhme,  Servetus  and 
others  later  on.  There  were  some  that  held  anthropomor- 
phic views.  The  Alexandrian  school  and  Origen  fought 
against  them.  Tertullian  laid  emphasis  upon  the  substan- 
tiality of  God  without  ascribing  to  Him  a  material  body. 

JusTi.v  Martyr  says  that  there  is  no  name  for  the  Father  of  all,  who 
is  unborn.  For  by  what  name  He  might  be  called,  the  person  who 
gave  Him  the  name  would  be  the  »older.  The  words  Father,  God, 
Creator,  Lord  and  Master  are  not  names  but  designations  derived  from 
His  good  works.  CKKMp:N'r  ok  Alkx.\xdria  says  that  we  can  tell,  not 
what  God  is,  but  what  He  is  not,  and  he  removes  from  God  all  finite 
characteristics.  God  is  neither  genus  nor  species,  substance  nor  accident. 
Even  after  giving  ourselves  to  Christ  our  consciousness  of  Him  is  more 
negative  than  positive.  His  views  were  not  anthropomorphic.  Tkr- 
TULLiAN  ascribed  to  God  a  body,  not  an  ordinary  human  body,  but 
a  form  of  existence.  He  maintained  that  nothing  could  be  without 
bodily  form  except  that  which  did  not  exist.  However,  w'e  cannot  count 
him  among  the  anthropomorphists.  OuuiKX  said  that  God  was  incom- 
prehensible and  past  finding  out.  As  the  brilliance  of  the  sun  exceeds 
the  light  of  a  lantern,  so  the  glory  of  God  exceeds  our  conception  of  Him. 


the'  beixg  of  god.  43 

The  Audians,  so-called  from  their  founder,  Audius  of  Mesopotamia, 
held  anthropomorphic  views  of  God.  Atiiaxa-sisus  holds  that  only  a 
pure  and  sinless  being  can  see  God.  God  cannot  be  seen  nor  compre- 
hended. His  essence  cannot  be  discovered  by  man  and  He  is  above 
all  substance.  Gregory  of  Nazianzus  calls  God  the  sea  of  being. 
EuxoMius  declared  that  God  did  not  know^  more  of  His  own  being  than 
we  do,  and  that  we  can  comprehend  Him.  Augustine  would  not  call 
God  a  substance,  for  that  would  imply  the  conception  of  accident.  Our 
language  cannot  deffne  the  essence  of  God.  John  of  Damascits  said 
that  God  is  above  all  knowledge. 

Joiix  ScoTus  Erigexa  held  the  view  that  God  did  not  know  Himself. 
He  is  nothing,  and  therefore  knows  not  what  He  is.  He  divides  nature, 
which  includes  God,  as  follows:  1)  That  which  creates  and  is  not 
created  (God);  2)  that  which  is  created  and  creates  (Logos);  3)  that 
which  is  created,  but  does  not  create  (the  world)  ;  4)  that  which  is 
neither  created  nor  creates  (God  as  the  goal).  Axselm  taught  that 
God  indeed  knows'  Himself,  but  we  cannot  obtain  adequate  knowledge 
of  Him.  THOiiAS  Aqhixa.s  declared  that  man  cannot  have  a  quid- 
ditative  (essential)  knowledge  of  God,  but  may  know  Him  in  His 
relation  to  the  created  world.  Albert  the  Great  distinguishes  between 
Deum  intellectu  attingere  et  comprehendere  and  ascribes  the  first- 
named  to  man.  Duxs  Scotus  maintained  that  man  could  have  a  quid- 
ditative  knowledge  of  God.  The  controversy  was  settled  as  follows: 
That  man  can  obtain  knowledge  of  God's  being,  cognitio  quidditatis 
Dei,  but  not  a  knowledge  complete  in  every  detail,  cognitio  quidditativa. 

The  fathers  of  the  Reformation  and  the  old  Dogmaticians  in  general 
consider  that  the  human  conceptions  of  God  are  inadequate.  Tiiomasius 
considered  that  our  knowledge  of  God  contains  elements  that  objec- 
tively represent  the  nature  of  God.  Piiilltppi  said  that  our  knowledge 
of  God,  while  true  and  well-founded,  does  not  objectively  express  the 
essence  of  God. 

B.     Concerning  the  Unity  of  God  and  the  Primitive  Char- 
acte7'istics  of  His  Being. 

Because  Christianity  acknowledged  Monotheism,  as  ex- 
plained in  the  doctrine  of  the  Trinity,  it  became  necessary 
to  combat  Polytheism,  Dualism  and  Gnosticism.  A  variety 
of  natural  and  mathematical  figures  of  speech  were  used 
to  prove  the  oneness  of  God.  Through  the  subsequent  con- 
troversies within  the  Church  itself  the  doctrine  of  Christian 
Monotheism  was  established.  Different  opinions  concern- 
ing that  which  is  primitive  in  the  essence  of  God  have  been 


44  THEOLOGY. 

set  forth  during-  the  different  periods  and  in  our  own  church 
there  has  likewise  been  a  diversity  of  views. 

JusTix  Martyk  said  that  the  unity  of  God  is  an  innate  idea,  and 
that  God  is  the  perfect  intellect.  Mixrcius  Fki.ix  and  Cyi'hiax  say 
that  as  there  is  one  ruler  in  a  kingdom,  one  queen  in  a  bee-hive,  and 
one  leader  in  a  flock,  so  there  can  be  only  one  God.  Julius  Afkicaxvs 
said  the  will  was  the  primitive  characteristic  of  God's  essence.  Okigex 
said  that  God  is  intelligence  and  intellect.  , 

Gkkcory  ok  Nyssa  sets  forth  the  unity  of  God  from  the  concept  of 
God's  perfection.  If  there  were  many  gods,  then  all  must  be  perfect; 
still  in  such  case  they  must  either  be  alike  or  unlike;  in  the  latter 
case  they  would  each  lack  the  perfection  of  the  others,  in  the  former 
case  there  would  be  only  one  God.  At'ci'.stixk  set  forth  the  divine  self- 
consciousness  as  the  primitive  characteristic  of  Gods'  essence.  Jonx  of 
Damascus  endeavored  to  conceive  of  the  unity  of  God  by  considering 
His  immensity,  for  if  there  were  many  gods,  the  one  could  find  no  room 
because  the  other  filled  all  space.  Axselm  says  that  self-consciousness 
is  the  primitive  characteristic  of  God's  essence.  Tho.mas  Aqiixas  sets 
forth  being,  while  Duxs  Scotus  sets  forth  the  will  as  the  primitive 
characteristic  of  the  essence  of  God. 

Li^THER  lays  stress  on  love  as  the  primitive  characteristic,  and  in  his 
work  De  Servo  Arbitrio  he  makes  mention  of  the  absolute  power. 
Gerhard  emphasizes  essence,  but  he  also  says:  in  Deo  idem  est  esse 
et  intelligere  et  velle.  Calovius  also  emphasizes  essence,  but  speaks 
of  God  as  the  absolute  Spirit  and  mentions  intellectus  and  voluntas. 
TiioxrAsius.  Jul.  Miiller  and  DELiTZfstii  set  forth  the  will  as  the  primi- 
tive chararacteristic.  Piiillippi  presents  God  in  the  first  place  as  the 
absolute  substance,  but  then  also  as  the  absolute  subject  and  as  love. 
He  also  mentions,  1)  self-consciousness  and  2)  self-determination. 
B.JciRLiXG  and  Gkanfelt  set  forth  being,  intellect  and  will  as  equally 
primitive.  The  latter  says  that  in  every  part  and  at  all  points  they 
must  come  in  contact  with,  measure  up  to  and  determine  one  another. 

§5.     CONCERNING  THE  DIVINE  ATTRIBUTES. 
1.    The  Conception  of  the  Attributes. 

In  the  theological  terminology  the  attributes  are  called 
attribnta.  Proprictates  set  forth  the  trinitarian  relation- 
ship and  prxdicata  special  acts,  such  as  creation,  etc.  But 
in  speaking  of  the  attributes  and  the  predicates  we  must 
not  consider  the  former  as  inactive,  for  God  is  an  actus 
purissimus. 

The  attributes  are  based  upon  the  essential  characteristics 


THE   mVIXE   ATTRIBUTES.  45 

of  God's  essence.  The  attributes  set  forth  the  relationship 
of  God's  essence  to  the  world.  His  essential  characteristics 
are  therefore  both  transcendent  and  immanent.  They  have 
two  sides,  one  inward  toward  God  Himself,  the  other  out- 
ward toward  the  world.  In  the  latter  case  the  essential 
characteristics  become  the  same  as  the  attributes.  The 
attributes  are  not  supplements  to  the  essence  of  God  which 
can  be  laid  aside  without  detriment  to  the  divine  being. 
The  attributes  are  therefore  unchangeable  and  permanent. 
Gerhard  says  that  the  attributes,  considered  per  se,  are 
really  one  with  the  divine  essence.  God  is  not,  therefore, 
a  combination  of  essence  and  attributes. 

With  regard  to  the  subjectivity  of  the  attributes  it  may 
be  remarked  that  they  are  not  the  subjective  products  of 
our  thought,  but  are  grounded  in  the  essence  of  God  and 
are  objectively  true,  although  they  are  not  to  be  considered 
as  disintegrated  parts.  Their  relation  is  such  that  they 
subsist  in  and  through  each  other.  Each  attribute  expresses 
the  whole  of  the  divine  essence,  otherwise  the  essence  would 
be  divided.  However,  this  does  not  nullify  the  distinction 
above  mentioned.  Each  attribute  gives  expression  to  the 
divine  essence  in  a  special  manner. 

Various  opinions  have  appeared  from  time  to  time  con- 
cerning the  objectivity  and  the  subjectivity  of  the  divine  at- 
tributes. According  to  Augustine  they  are  distinguished 
subjectively  only  in  our  own  thought.  In  De  trin.,  VI,  7, 
he  says :  "His  greatness  is  the  same  as  His  wisdom,  for  He 
is  not  great  by  bulk  but  by  power ;  His  goodness  is  the  same 
as  His  wisdom  and  His  greatness,  and  His  truth  is  the  same 
as  all  these  things,  and  in  Him  it  is  not  one  thing  to  be 
blessed  and  another  thing  to  be  great  or  wise,  true,  good, 
or  in  a  word,  to  be  Himself."  Thomas  Aquinas  said  that 
the  conceptual  distinctions  on  the  part  of  man  were  well 
grounded  objectively  (fundamentum  aliquid  in  re) ,  and 
distinguished  between  dwtinctio  rationis  ratiocinantis,  a 
subjective  distinction,  and  distinctio  rationis  ratiociifiatse , 
which  is  grounded  in  the  object.  QUENSTEDT  follows 
Thomas  Aquinas  and  uses  his  terms,  but  says,  nevertheless, 


46  THEOLOGY. 

that  strictly  and  correctly  speaking,  God  has  no  attributes, 
but  is  the  most  simple  essence,  which  cannot  be  resolved 
into  parts  and  is  without  all  composition.  By  reason  of  the 
fact  that  we  cannot  comprehend  the  divine  essence  in  an 
adequate  manner,  therefore  we  endeavor  to  apprehend  it 
by  means  of  distinct  and  inadequate  conceptions  which  im- 
perfectly represent  the  divine  essence,  and  these  concep- 
tions are  called  attributes.  HOLLAZius  says:  "The  divine 
attributes  are  distinguished  from  the  divine  essence  and 
from  each  other  not  nominally,  nor  really,  but  formally,  ac- 
cording to  our  mode  of  conceiving,  not  without  a  certain 
foundation  of  distinction."  Schleiermacher  says  that  the 
attributes  do  not  represent  anything  in  the  essence  of  God, 
nor  in  His  relation  to  the  world,  but  are  the  relationships 
inherent  in  the  idea  of  God  as  found  in  the  Christian  con- 
sciousness. Thomasius  considers  that  the  attributes  are 
found  not  only  in  our  reason,  but  also  in  God  Himself. 
Phillippi  takes  the  view  that  they  are  not  objective  and 
distinct  attributes  in  the  essence  of  God,  but  that  they  are 
nevertheless  true  and  grounded  in  the  revelation  of  God. 

2.    How  We  Gain  Knowledge  of  the  Divine  Attributes. 

The  Church  Fathers  in  general  taught  that  we  gain  knowl- 
edge of  the  attributes  in  three  ways.  Dogmaticians,  such 
as  Gerhard  and  Hollazius,  used  the  same  method  and  like- 
wise taught  that  we  gain  knowledge  of  the  attributes  via 
negationis,  via  causalitatis  and  via  eminentiae. 

Via  negationis  sets  out  from  the  principle :  quod  summe 
perfectum  est,  ei  nullus  inest  defectus,  or  that  there  is  no 
imperfection  in  that  which  in  the  highest  sense  is  perfect. 
We  remove  from  God  whatever  implies  imperfection  in 
creatures,  and  ascribe  to  Him  an  opposite  perfection,  so 
that  we  say  that  He  is  perfect,  independent,  immeasurable, 
immortal,  etc. 

Via  cnuftalitatis  is  based  upon  the  following  principle: 
effectus  testatur  de  causa  ej  usque  perfectione,  or  that  an 
effect  testifies  of  the  cause  and  its  perfection.     We  ascribe 


THE  DIVINE  ATTRIBUTES.  47 

to  God  as  the  cause  the  good  attributes  which  are  revealed 
in  His  works. 

Via  eminentise  is  derived  from  the  principle :  quidquid 
exstat  in  effectu  praeexistit  in  causa,  or  whatever  exists  in 
the  effect,  pre-exists  in  the  cause ;  so  that  we  ascribe  to  God 
in  the  highest  degree  those  attributes  which  we  find  in  a 
lower  degree  in  ourselves. 

Through  via  negationis  we  learn  of  God's  transcendence 
and  through  the  other  methods  we  learn  of  His  immanence. 
It  is  necessary  to  unite  these  three  ways  and  not  to  separate 
them,  in  order  to  derive  a  perfect  idea  of  God's  attributes. 

3.    Division  of  the  Attributes. 

Dogmaticians  have  divided  the  attributes  in  many  ways. 
Baier,  Schmid  and  others  have  divided  them  into  negative 
attributes,  such  as  unity,  simplicity,  eternity,  immensity 
and  immutability;  and  jjositive,  such  as  life,  wisdom,  justice, 
truth,  power,  goodness  and  perfection.  Others,  such  as 
Björling,  divide  them  into  the  attributes  of  being,  knowing 
and  willing.  The  attributes  of  absolute  being  are,  eternity, 
omnipresence,  immutability,  and  immensity;  the  attributes 
of  the  absolute  intellect  are,  omniscience,  omnisapience ;  the 
attributes  of  the  absolute  will  are,  power,  holiness,  right- 
eousness, truthfulness  and  love.  Phillippi  :  The  attributes 
of  the  absolute  substance  are  eternity  and  omnipresence ; 
of  the  absolute  subject,  power  and  omniscience ;  of  the  abso- 
lute love,  wisdom,  righteousness  and  goodness.  Thomasius 
divides  the  attributes  into  immanent  and  relative.  Among 
the  former  are  eternity,  immensity,  etc.,  and  among  the 
latter  power,  omniscience,  omnipresence,  etc.  It  is  our  pur- 
pose to  follow  this  division  in  the  section  of  Christology. 

Luthardt  in  his  dogmatics  makes  use  of  a  combination  of 
SCHLEIERMACHER  and  NiTZSCH :  1)  Essential  character- 
istics according  to  the  conception  of  the  absolute  personality 
or  according  to  the  Scriptures :  Life,  light  and  love.  2)  Those 
attributes  that  express  the  relationship  of  the  absolute  per- 
sonality to  the  world:  A.  God's  relationship  to  the  natural 
world:    a)   Distinct  from  the  world   (eternity,  infinity  and 


48  THEOLOGY. 

immutability)  ;  b)  Contact  with  the  world  (omnipresence, 
power,  omniscience  and  wisdom)  ;  B.  God's  relationship  to 
the  moral  world:  a)  Separated  from  but  active  in  the 
moral  world  (holiness,  righteousness  and  truthfulness;  b) 
Contact  (love  as  expressed  in  goodness,  mercy,  longsuffer- 
ing,  patience,  meekness,  faithfulness,  etc.)." 

4.    Essential  Characteristics.  * 

In  accordance  with  the  conception  of  the  absolute  per- 
sonality we  might  say  that  the  essential  characteristics  or 
the  transcendental  attributes  are  the  following:  Perfection 
or  the  harmony  between  being,  intellect  and  will,  self- 
sufficiency  and  love.  In  this  connection,  however,  we  wish 
to  consider  the  essential  characteristics  according  to  Bib- 
lical expressions,  as  life,  light  and  love. 

a.  Vita  or  life.  God  is  the  absolute  life,  the  absolutely 
harmonious  life.  He  possesses  the  principle  of  His  own 
existence  in  Himself.  QUENSTEDT  says:  "The  life  of  God 
is  that  attribute  by  which  His  essence  ever  manifests  its 
activity,"  Cf.  Ezekiel,  chap  1,  concerning  the  living  crea- 
tures and  the  wheels,  etc.;  "A  living  God"  (Acts  14:  15)  ; 
"The  Father  hath  life  in  himself"  (John  5:  26)  ;  "Neither 
is  he  served  by  men's  hands,  as  though  he  needed  anything, 
seeing  he  himself  giveth  to  all  life,  and  breath,  and  all 
things"  (Acts  17:  25);  "Who  only  hath  immortality"  (1 
Tim.  6:  16). 

b.  Lux  or  light.  God  is  the  absolute  light.  Of  all  things 
light  is  the  purest.  God  is  therefore  the  absolute  truth, 
wisdom  and  holiness.  Compare  how  the  divine  majesty  is 
described  in  Ezekiel  1  and  in  Daniel  7.  "Every  good  gift 
and  every  perfect  gift  is  from  above,  coming  down  from 
the  Father  of  lights"  (James  1 :  17)  ;  "And  this  is  the  mes- 
sage which  we  have  heard  from  Him  an  announce  to  you, 
that  God  is  the  light,  and  in  him  is  no  darkness  at  all"  (1 
John  1:5),  etc. 

*  Luthardt's  Conipendiuni.  S29,  p.  99. 


THE   DIVINE  ATTRIBUTES.  49 

c.  Amor  or  love.  God  lives  within  Himself  the  life  of 
everlasting  love.  In  God  are  found  both  the  subject  and 
object  of  love  and  also  the  union  between  them.  "He  that 
loveth  not  knoweth  not  God;  for  God  is  love"  (1  John  4:8); 
"The  Father  loveth  the  Son"  (John  3:  35)  ;  "Thou  lovedst 
me  before  the  foundation  of  the  world"  (John  17:  24). 
Compare  vv.  23,  26. 

In  regard  to  these  three  essential  characteristics  or  at- 
tributes of  the  divine  essence  we  add  to  what  is  above  stated : 
Vita  is  the  essential  attribute  which  corresponds  to  His  per- 
fection as  an  expression  of  the  divine  intensive  or  qualita- 
tive unity.  No  one  can  define  life,  and  God  is  the  essence 
of  life.  All  life  depends  on  God,  spiritual,  physical,  angelic, 
human,  animal  and  vegetable.  In  regard  to  Logos  John 
says :  "In  him  was  life."  The  incarnated  Logos,  or  Christ, 
says :  "I  am  the  life."  Christ  defines  eternal  life  as  knowl- 
edge of  God  and  Himself.  Cf.  John  17:3:  "And  this  is  life 
eternal,  that  they  should  know  thee  the  only  true  God,  and 
him  whom  thou  didst  send,  even  Jesus  Christ."  Lux,  the 
second  great  essential  attribute,  corresponds  to  the  self- 
sufficiency  of  God  as  expressed  by  the  exclusive  or  numerical 
unity  of  the  divine  essence.  According  to  the  numerical 
unity  God  is  unicus  and  none  is  like  Him,  and  He  is  the  only 
one  who  is  self-sufficient.  He  is,  therefore,  the  absolute 
light  and  has  all  light  within  Himself.  And  all  light  in  the 
world  has  its  source  in  Him.  The  incarnated  Logos  is  the 
light  of  the  world.  In  John  1 :  9  we  read:  "There  was  the 
true  light,  even  the  light  which  lighteth  every  man,  coming 
into  the  world."  In  James  1 :  17  God  is  called  the  Father 
of  lights.  Amor  is  the  third  attribute  which. is  character- 
istic of  the  divine  essence.  God  is  love,  which  is  the  material 
element  of  the  Absolute  Personality.  The  diversification  of 
external  attributes  was  not  necessary  for  God  Himself.  He 
lived  eternally  and  lives  eternally  in  love.  When  God  cre- 
ated angels  and  man  the  love  of  God  flowed  out  in  the  uni- 
verse. What  would  the  world  be  without  the  life,  light  and 
love  of  God ! 

Dngmatics.      3. 


5.    The  Special  Attributes. 

A.    In  Relation  to  the  Natural  Woiid. 

a.  Immanent  Attributes,  Distinct  from  the  Natural 
World. 

^ternitas,  or  eternity,  is  that  attribute  of  God  which 
expresses  His  possession  of  the  fulness  of  infinite  life  and 
that  in  an  absolute  sense  He  is  independent  of  time  by  ivhich 
all  finite  existences  are  conditioried. 

We  cannot  comprehend  the  idea  of  eternity  because  we 
view  it  from  the  standpoint  of  time  and  because  we  lack 
suitable  analogies.  Someone  has  compared  eternity  to  a 
circle  and  time  to  a  line  passing  off  from  the  periphery  of 
the  circle.  It  might  still  better  be  said  that  the  line  is 
within  the  periphery.  In  the  nature  of  the  case  God  must 
be  eternal  also  from  the  point  of  view  that  He  is  without 
beginning,  for  who  or  what  could  have  existed  if  God  had 
not  been?  We  cannot  conceive  of  anything  existing  before 
God.  And  if  there  was  nothing,  neither  could  there  be  the 
concept  "nothing."  We  cannot  comprehend  the  eternity  of 
God  because  of  the  limitations  of  our  thought,  but  it  would 
be  just  as  incomprehensible  that  God  should  not  be  eternal. 

Among  Scripture  passages  the  following  may  be  here 
noted :  "Before  the  mountains  were  brought  forth,  or  ever 
thou  hadst  formed  the  earth  and  the  world,  even  from  ever- 
lasting to  everlasting,  thou  art  God"  (Ps.  90:  2);  "Thou 
art  the  same,  and  thy  years  shall  have  no  end"  (Ps.  102: 
27)  ;  "With  thee  is  the  fountain  of  life"  (Ps.  36:  9)  ;  "His 
everlasting  power  and  divinity"  (Rom.  1:  20)  ;  "And  he  is 
before  all  things"  (Col.  1:  17)  ;  "And  sware  by  him  that 
liveth  for  ever  and  ever"  (Rev.  10:  6),  etc. 

Augustine  understood  eternity  to  be  never-ceasing  being, 
BOETiiius  defines  eternity  thus:  Quod  sit  interminabilis 
vitae  tota  simul  et  perfecta  possessio.  Anselm  declares  that 
concerning  God  it  can  only  be  said  that  He  is.  Thomas 
Aquinas  said  that  eternity  is  the  same  as  tota  simul.  Ger- 
hard* says  that  the  Scholastics  define  eternity  as  follows: 

*  Gerh.  Loci  Theologici,  Tomus  I,  Cap.  VIII,  Sectio  IV,  pp.  307,  137. 


THE    DIVINE    ATTKIBUTES.  51 

Quod  sit  duratio  interminabilis,  indivisibilis  et  independens. 
Interminabilis,  quia  excludit  terminum  a  quo  et  ad  quern ; 
indivisibilis,  quia  excludit  omnem  successionem  temporis; 
independens,  quia  excludit  omnem  imperfectionem  ac  muta- 
tionem.  Hase  defines :  "That  attribute  by  which  God,  Him- 
self independent  of  all  time,  is  the  creator  of  time,  by  which 
all  finite  existences  are  conditioned."  Martensen  :  "God 
is  eternal  as  that  esserice  which  possesses  life  and  fulness 
in  itself,  a  living  eternity  which  ever  blossoms  forth  in  un- 
fadirig  youth."  LUTHARDT* :  "Supertime,  which  is  not 
quantitatively  but  qualitatively  separated  from  that  which 
exists  in  time,  that  which  is  purely  present,  and  which 
therefore  comprises  the  background  which  sustains  time 
and  which  at  every  moment  can  dwell  within  the  same." 

Immensitas,  immensity,  BAiERf  defines :  "The  immensity 
of  God  consists  in  this,  that  the  divine  essence  cannot  be 
measured  by,  or  included  within,  any  local  limits."  Im- 
mensity is  the  infinity  of  God  or  His  absolute  transcendence 
above  spatial  relations.  We  must  understand  God's  im- 
mensity not  extensively  but  intensively. 

"Do  not  I  fill  heaven  and  earth?  saith  Jehovah"  (Jer.  23: 
24)  ;  "But  will  God  in  very  deed  dwell  on  earth?  behold, 
heaven  and  the  heaven  of  heavens  cannot  contain  thee ;  how 
much  less  this  house  that  I  have  builded!"  (1  Kings  8:  27), 

Immutabilitas  or  immutability,  according  to  Björling, 
is  that  attribute  by  which  God,  independent  of  time,  is  also 
independent  of  all  those  changes  that  continually  take  place 
in  time.  BAiERt :  "Immutabilitas  consistit  in  eo,  quod  Deus 
nulli  mutationi,  neque  secundum  esse,  neque  secundum  ac- 
cidentia, neque  secundum  locum,  neque  secundum  volunta- 
tem  aut  propositum  est  obnoxius."  According  to  this 
definition  the  immutability  of  God  consists  in  this,  that  God 
cannot  be  subject  to  any  change:  1)  in  regard  to  essence, 
because  He  is  eternal,  2)  in  regard  to  accidental  attributes, 

because  all  in  God  is  essential,    3)   in  regard  to  space,  be- 

1 — 

*  Kompendium,  Fifth  Ed.,  Trans,  by  Neander,  p.  100. 

t  Baieri  Comp.  Pars  I,  Cap.  1,  §XII. 

t  Baieri  Comp.  Theol.  Pos.,  Caput.  I,  §X. 


52  TIIKOI.OliV. 

cause  He  is  omnipresent,  4)  in  regard  to  will,  because  He 
can  do  what  He  wills,  5)  in  regard  to  purpose  or  resolution, 
because  He  is  omniscient  and  all-wise.  But  the  immuta- 
bility of  God  ad  extra  and  ad  intra  does  not  imply  a  mo- 
notonous sameness,  a  barren,  petrified  existence,  or  such 
like.  When,  therefore,  we  read  of  God's  repentance,  and 
that  He  does  not  punish  men  when  they  repent,  as  in  Nine- 
veh, although  He  had  threatened  to  punish,  this  does  not 
militate  against  His  immutability,  but  rather  emphasize-j: 
it,  because  God  thereby  corresponds  to  His  own  nature. 
God's  seeming  change  is  in  fact  a  change  of  relation  on 
the  part  of  man.  When  sinners,  like  the  people  of  Nineveh, 
are  wicked  and  do  not  repent,  they  are  exposed  to  the  justice 
of  God,  but  when  they  repent,  they  enter  into  a  new  relation 
and  receive  God's  grace  and  mercy.  As  an  analogy  we  may 
use  the  sun  and  our  relation  to  it.  We  may  place  ourselves 
in  such  a  relation  to  the  sun  that  we  are  healed  and  live, 
but  we  may  also  expose  ourselves  in  such  a  way  that  we 
are  hurt  and  killed  by  sunstroke.  God  is  not  only  love,  but 
also  a  consuming  fire.  Each  attribute  of  God  works  im- 
mutably according  to  its  nature. ,  How  God's  love  and  justice 
work  immutably  and  do  not  conflict  is  evident  in  the  great 
work  of  reconciliation.  In  love  God  sends  His  Son  and  in 
justice  He  sacrifices  Him  for  the  expiation  of  the  sins  of  the 
world.  The  immutability  of  God  is  an  earnest  that  in  a 
living  way  He  answers  to  all  His  attributes.  Prayer,  for 
instance,  would  be  worthless,  if  God  were  mutable  ad  intra 
or  ad  extra.  But  because  He  is  immutable,  therefore  prayer 
has  a  sure  foundation.  God  appears  in  history  and  enters 
into  the  life  of  individuals  and  of  nations  and  follows  the 
history  of  mankind  with  great  sympathy.  The  following 
Scripture  passages  may  be  quoted:  "I,  Jehovah,  change  not" 
(Mai.  3 :  6)  ;  "Every  good  gift  and  every  perfect  gift  is  from 
above,  coming  down  from  the  Father  of  lights,  with  whom 
can  be  no  variation,  neither  shadow  that  is  cast  by  turning" 
(James  1:  17). 


THE    DIVIXE    ATTRIBUTES.  53 

b.     Relative  Attributes  or  Attributes  of  Contact. 

Omnipr^sentia,  or  omnipresence,  Hase  defines  as  fol- 
lows: "That  attribute  by  tvhich  God,  Himself  independent 
of  all  space,  is  the  creator  of  space,  by  luhich  all  material 
substayices  are  conditioned."  God's  transcendence  as  well 
as  His  immanence  are  united  in  His  omnipresence.  Of 
course  we  are  unable  to  understand  completely  how  God  can 
be  omnipresent,  but  we  can  understand  it  in  part  by  pre- 
senting certain  qualifying  characteristics. 

Negative  characteristics  are  such  as  the  following:  1) 
non  circumscriptive,  because  God  is  not  limited  as  to  space ; 
2)  non  definitive,  as  pneumatic  bodies  and  angels  are 
present  somewhere;  3)  non  extensive,  by  extension  as  the 
ether  or  the  universe;  4)  non  per  rar ef actionem,  because 
God  is  not  present  through  rarefaction  or  diminution;  5) 
non  per  multiplicationem  or  ihrovighrauMi^McSiiion',  6)  non 
per  divisionem  or  through  the  division  of  His  essence. 
Positive  characteristics  of  His  prsesentia  are  the  following: 
1)  illocalis,  because,  although  His  throne  is  in  heaven.  He 
is  intensively  present  everywhere  but  not  limited  to  any 
certain  place;  2)  intensiva,^  or  that  His  essence  is  of  such 
a  nature  that  He  can  be  present  everywhere  without  exten- 
sion; 3)  repletiva,  or  that  God,  Himself  contained  within 
no  bounds,  contains  or  enfolds  all  things  as  in  a  little  point 
(Gerhard:  omnia  instar  minutissimi  puncti  continens)  ; 
4)  Indivisibilis,  because  ubicunque  est,  totus  est,  for  God 
cannot  be  divided,  so  that  a  part  of  His  essence  should  be 


*  When  we  say  that  God  is  everywhere  present  in  an  intensive  sense, 
this  implies  in  the  first  place  the  opposite  of  an  extensive  omnipresence. 
The  theological  expression  implies  more  than  intensity  in  the  ordinary 
sense.  Although  God  cannot  be  or  rather  is  not  extended  everywhere 
in  a  local  sense,  yet  He  is  everywhere  by  reason  of  the  inward  power 
and  nature  of  His  essence.  There  is  no  analogy.  Our  thought  can  be 
present  at  many  places  without  extension.  In  a  real  sense  God  can  be 
everywhere.  Our  spirit  or  soul  can  without  extension  be  present 
throughout  the  body,  and  still  the  soul  has  its  seat  somewhere.  God 
is  everywhere  present  throughout  the  universe,  but  He  reveals  Himself 
specially  in  heaven,  from  whence  He  is  intensively  and  repletively 
present  everywhere.  It  is  not  unthinkable,  although  it  is  inexplicable, 
that  an  absolute  essence  can  be  so  constituted  that  it  can  be  present 
everywhere  in  an  illocal  sense,  and  yet  reveal  itself  somewhere.  If  we 
think  of  Christ,  the  matter  becomes  clearer. 


54  TIIKOI.OGY. 

at  one  place  and  a  part  at  another;  5)  incomprehensihilis  or 
incomprehensible,  for  there  is  no  analogy  that  can  represent 
the  substantial  presence,  but  we  can  understand  that  a  being 
can  be  constituted  in  such  a  manner  when  that  being  is  an 
absolute  personality  or  God.  The  thought  of  man  can  be 
at  many  places.  While  this  is  not  an  analogy,  still  we  may 
learn  from  it  that  God  who  is  an  absolute  spirit  can  in- 
tensively be  present  everywhere;  6)  operativa,  so  that  God 
is  actively  present  everywhere.  Our  soul  is  operatively 
present  in  the  body.  A  speaker  in  an  auditorium  is  opera- 
tively present  everywhere  in  the  whole  room,  although  not 
locally  through  extension.  A  king  is  present  in  an  opera- 
tive sense  throughout  his  whole  kingdom.  There  is,  how- 
ever, this  difference  with  God,  that  He  is  both  substantially 
and  operatively  present  everywhere. 

The  Scriptures  clearly  teach  the  omnipresence  of  God : 
"Know  therefore  this  day,  and  lay  it  to  thy  heart,  that  Je- 
hovah he  is  God  in  heaven  above  and  upon  earth  beneath" 
(Deut.  4:  39)  ;  "Do  not  I  fill  heaven  and  earth?  saith  Je- 
hovah" (Jer.  23:  24)  ;  "Thou  hast  beset  me  behind  and  be- 
fore, and  laid  thy  hand  upon  me.  If  I  ascend  up  into  heaven 
thou  art  there :  if  I  make  my  bed  in  Sheol,  behold,  thou  art 
there"  (Ps.  139:  5,  8)  ;  "Jehovah  is  nigh  unto  all  them  that 
call  upon  him"  (Ps.  145:  18)  ;  "Christ  says:  "I  am  with  you 
always,  even  unto  the  end  of  the  world"  (Matt.  28:  20)  : 
Paul  says  concerning  God :  "In  him  we  live,  and  move,  and 
have  our  being"  (Acts  17:  28),  etc. 

Hermes  Trismegistus  said  that  God  is  an  intellectual 
sphere  whose  center  is  everywhere  and  whose  periphery  is 
nowhere.  Augustine  said  that  it  would  be  more  suitable 
to  say  that  all  things  are  in  God  than  that  God  is  in  all 
things.  Thomas  Aquinas  said  that  the  essential  presence 
of  God  gives  reality  to  space  and  its  affections.  Gerhard 
says  among  many  other  things  on  this  subject:  "Deus  est 
totus  in  omnibus,  totus  in  singulis,  totus  in  se  ipso."  The 
old  Dogmaticians  call  God's  substantial  presence  in  things 
immediatio  sujjpositi,  and  His  activity  they  call  immediatio 
virtutis.     The  former  term  implies  that  there  is  no  inter- 


THE   DIVINE    ATTRIRTTTES.  55 

mediary  subject,  the  second  that  there  is  no  intermediary 
power  beside  God's  own.  God's  presence  has  also  been  con- 
sidered as  revealing  His  power,  grace  and  glory.  The  Gies- 
sen  and  Sa^on  theologians  taught  a  specialis  approximatio 
essential;  ^av.nse  ad  substantiam  credentium.  The  Tilbingen 
theologians,  however,  and  especially  Gerhard  and  Mus^us 
in  Jena,  spoke  of  a  gratiosa  operatio.  In  general  it  is  taught 
that  the  presence  of  God  is  both  siibstantialis  and  operativa. 
Some  have  taught  a  modified  omnipresence  which  implies 
merely  an  operative  presence,  while  others  have  taught  a 
relative  presence,  i.  e.,  God  is  present  wherever  He  wills  to 
be.  But  the  Scriptures  set  forth  an  omnipresence  that  is 
more  general  than  those  implied  in  omniprsesentia  modifi- 
cata  and  relativa,  so  that  we  may  say  that  it  is  an  omniprse- 
sentia  absoluta  which  also  implies  the  operativa.  The  omni- 
presence of  God  is  absolute,  both  substantial  and  operative. 
Just  as  the  soul  in  its  entirety  is  everywhere  in  the  body, 
God  as  the  absolute  spirit  is  totally  in  every  place  of  the 
universe.  But  His  presence  may  not  be  recognized.  As  a 
figure  or  analogy  we  may  use  electricity.  There  must  be 
an  induction.  Think  of  the  induction  of  electricity  by 
Franklin's  kite  and  how  it  led  to  the  great  electrical  inven- 
tions !  God  has  given  us  the  means  of  grace,  and  we  should 
use  those  means.  And  there  may  be  so-called  spiritual  in- 
duction by  prayer,  when  we  realize  the  presence  of  God, 
A  Christian  feels  daily  the  presence  of  the  Lord  in  the 
mystical  union.  There  are  many  promises  as  to  the  pres- 
ence of  the  Lord.  But  God  is  present  independent  of  our 
feeling. 

Omnipotentia  or  power.  On  the  basis  of  the  intensive 
unity,  God  is  the  perfect  essence.  He  is  also  the  absolute 
power  because  His  will  harmonizes  with  His  essence.  Om- 
nipotence is  therefore  that  attribute  of  God  by  tvhich  He 
can  do  all  things  that  are  not  contrary  to  His  ivilL  Om- 
nipotentia is  called  absoluta  when  we  consider  the  divine 
power  as  active  at  the  creation  and  in  the  miracles ;  relativa 
or  ordinata,  when  we  consider  it  as  mediated  through  the 
laws  of  nature. 


56  THEOLOGY. 

The  divine  will  is  named  and  divided  as  follows :  Voluntas 
necestnaria  or  vat ii rails,  by  which  God  wills  and  determines 
Himself,  and  voluntas  libera,  by  which  God  determines  the 
whole  universe  and  all  definite  things.  Voluntas  libera  is 
divided  as  follows:  1)  with  regard  to  the  relation  of  tho 
will  to  outside  objects,  a)  prima,  absoluta  or  antecedens, 
and  b)  secunda,  conditionata  or  consequens.  The  former 
refers  to  a  disposition  of  God  without  reference  to  any  con- 
ditions; the  latter  to  one  in  which  conditions  and  circum- 
stances are  considered;  2)  with  regard  to  the  imparting  of 
the  content  of  the  divine  will,  a)  beneplaciti  or  abscondita, 
the  secret  will,  and  b)  signi  (on  account  of  certain  signs) 
or  revelata,  the  revealed  will.  These  divisions  have  mostly 
arisen  through  the  controversy  on  election. 

The  Scriptures  present  the  power  or  omnipotence  of  God 
in  the  form  of  figures  or  in  direct  statements :  "The  arm  of 
thy  strength"  (Ps.  89:  10)  ;  "The  right  hand  of  the  Lord 
doeth  valiantly"  (Ps.  118:  16)  ;  "or  he  spake,  and  it  was 
done:  he  commanded,  and  it  stood  fast"  (Ps.  33:  9)  ;  "With 
God  all  things  are  possible"  (Matt.  19:  26)  ;  "The  Lord  al- 
mighty" (2  Cor.  6:  18;  Rev.  1:8),  etc. 

Chrysostom  and  John  of  Damascus  spoke  of  an  ante- 
cedent and  subsequent  will.  Prosper  Aquitanus  distin- 
guished between  a  secret  and  a  revealed  will  of  God.  The 
former  was  seria  or  efficax  and  the  latter  was  non  seria, 
for  the  secret  will  had  reference  to  those  chosen  for  salva- 
tion, but  the  revealed  will  had  reference  to  the  universal 
call  which  was  not  serious.  Clearly  the  secret  and  the  re- 
vealed will  cannot  conflict  with  each  other,  for  then  the 
veracity  of  God  would  be  annulled.  Abelard  said  that  God 
cannot  do  anything  except  what  He  does.  We  may  say  that 
God  can  do  all  that  He  wills,  but  He  does  not  do  all  that  He 
can.  Duns  Scotus  declared  that  God  could  determine  what 
is  good,  and  therefore  conceived  God's  will  to  be  arbitrary. 
Luther  sanctioned  the  division  of  the  will  as  secret  and 
revealed.  Calvin  misinterpreted  the  division  in  the  same 
manner  as  Prosper  Aquitanus.  But  the  misinterpretation 
does  not  hinder  the  use  of  terms  which,  when  correctly  em- 


THE    DIVIXE    ATTRIIiUTES.  57 

ployed,  serve  to  explain  this  attribute,  as  in  the  relation  be- 
tween the  determined  order  of  God  and  His  daily  providence. 

Omniscientia  or  omniscience.  By  this  attribute  is  meant 
that  God  in  an  immediate  and  perfect  manner  knows  all 
that  which  under  certain  conditions  can  happen  and  be. 
To  God  are  ascribed  memory,  vision  and  foreknowledge. 
There  is,  however,  no  distinction  as  to  the  formal  part  of 
God's  knowledge,  but  only  as  to  the  objects.  With  regard 
to  praescientia  it  may  be  remarked  that  there  is  no  deter- 
minism implied  in  it,  inasmuch  as  the  acts  do  not  take  place 
by  reason  of  God's  foreknowledge,  but  God  foresees  that 
they  shall  occur.  With  regard  to  the  character  of  God's 
knowledge  it  may  be  pointed  out  that  it  is  called  intuitiva, 
in  contradistinction  to  demonstrative  and  (iiscursive  knowl- 
edge, for  in  the  thought  of  God  all  things  are  immediately 
present;  simultmiea,  to  distinguish  it  from  that  which  is 
successive,  for  God  knows  and  sees  all  things  simultaneous- 
ly; distinctissima,  or  perfectly  clear,  and  verissima,  or  per- 
fectly true. 

Scientia  is  divided  as  follows:  1)  Scientia  necessaria  or 
naturalis,  by  which  is  meant  that  God  knows  His  own  abso- 
lute essence  and  all  possible  things.  This  knowledge-  is 
called  scientia  simplicis  iyitelligeyitise,  when  the  knowledge 
•  embraces  those  possible  things  that  are  the  objects  of 
thought  only.  As  examples  we  call  attention  to  the  fact 
that  God  knows  evil  ideally  or  theoretically,  but  not  by  per- 
sonal experience.  There  are  many  things  we  know  ideally 
and  are  able  to  present  concretely  in  our  minds.  The  Su-, 
preme  Mind  can  understand  fully  everything  and  picture  it 
correctly  in  His  own  thought.  If  man  had  not  fallen,  evil 
would  have  been  known  to  him  according  to  the  method  of 
scientia  simplicis  intelligentiae.  2)  Scientia  libera  or  God's 
knowledge  of  all  that  exists.  This  knowledge  is  also  called 
scientia  visionis  or  God's  penetrating  vision  or  perception 
of  real  beings  and  things,  coram  intuendo.  3)  Scientia 
media  or  conditionata^  by  which  is  meant  God's  knowledge 
of  those  things  that  could  have  happened  or  can  now  happen 
under  certain  conditions. 


58  tup:oi.ogy. 

There  are  many  Scripture  passages  that  set  forth  the 
omniscience  of  God,  among  which  the  following  may  be 
quoted:  "Known  unto  God  are  all  his  works  from  the  be- 
ginning of  the  world"  (Acts  15:  18)  ;  "And  there  is  no 
creature  that  is  not  manifest  in  his  sight :  but  all  things  are 
naked  and  laid  open  before  his  eyes"  (Heb.  4:  13)  ;  "God 
knoweth  all  things"  (1  John  3:  20)  ;  "Thou  knowest  the 
hearts  of  all  the  children  of  men"  (1  Kings  8:  39)  ;  "Thou 
understandest  my  thought  afar  off ;  There  is  not  a  word  in 
my  tongue,  but,  lo,  0  Jehovah,  thou  knowest  it  altogether" 
(Ps.  139:  2—4),  etc. 

Origen  said  that  God's  foreknowledge  is  not  the  same  as 
His  predetermination,  for  the  free  acts  do  not  happen  by 
reason  of  God's  foreknowledge,  but  God  foresees  that  they 
shall  happen.  However,  Origen  limited  the  knowledge  of 
God  when  he  endeavored  to  prove  the  finiteness  of  the  world 
by  the  argument  that  God  could  not  understand  the  world 
if  it  were  infinite.  The  term  scientia  media  originated  with 
the  Jesuits  FONSECA  and  Molina  in  the  sixteenth  century 
during  the  controversy  concerning  election.  The  Socinians 
declared  that  the  acts  of  man  could  not  be  free  by  reason 
of  God's  foresight.  Rothe  and  Martensen  both  sought  to 
defend  the  Socinian  view  asserting  that  God  arranged  a 
schedule  of  the  world  plan  and  that  the  free  acts  of  man 
as  they  occur  constitute  the  filling  in  of  this  schedule.  How- 
ever, this  view  militates  against  the  perfection  of  God  and 
is  not  a  satisfactory  explanation.  We  must  distinguish  be- 
tween the  foreknowledge  and  the  predetermination  of  God. 
The  knowledge  of  God  and  His  will  do  not  always  agree,  in- 
asmuch as  God  knows  much  that  He  does  not  will. 

Omnisapientia  or  wisdom.  God's  wisdom  is  the  perfect 
correspondence  of  His  thought  with  the  absolute  good.  God 
is  all-wise  because  He  infalliblij  knows  the  best  means  to  be 
used  to  accomplish  purposed  ends.  God's  omnisapience  im- 
plies, therefore,  teleology  or  causa  finalis. 

The  Word  of  God  teaches  the  omnisapience  of  God,  as  in 
the  following  passages:  "Whence  then  cometh  wisdom?  And 
where  is  the  place  of  understanding?     God  understandeth 


THE    DIVINE    ATTRIIU'TES.  59 

the  way  thereof,  and  knoweth  the  place  thereof.  He  made 
a  weight  for  the  wind:  yea,  He  meteth  out  the  waters  by 
measure.  When  He  made  a  decree  for  the  rain,  and  a  way 
for  the  lightning  of  the  thunder;  then  did  he  see  it,  and 
declare  it"  (Job  28:  20,  23,  25—27)  ;  "0  the  depth  of  the 
riches  both  of  the  wisdom  and  the  knowledge  of  God"  (Rom. 
11:  33)  ;  "The  only  wise  God"  (Rom.  16:  26)  ;  "Christ,  in 
whom  are  all  the  treasures  of  wisdom  and  knowledge  hid- 
den" (Col.  2:  3),  etc. 

B.    In  Relatio7i  to  the  Moral  World. 
a.     Immanent  Attributes,  Distinct  from  the  Moral  World. 

Sanctitas,  justitia  interna,  or  God's  holiness  is  the 
correpondence  of  the  will  of  God  luith  the  absolute  good  or 
perfectio7i.  God's  holiness  contains  a  negative  element,  in- 
asmuch as  God  is  separated  from  all  that  is  unclean  and 
sinful,  and  also  a  positive  element,  because  God  as  the  abso- 
lutely Holy  One  wills  that  all  creatures  should  be  holy. 

Baier  defines  God's  holiness  as  the  rectitude  of  His  will, 
wherefore  He  wills  all  things  that  are  right  and  good  in 
accordance  with  His  eternal  law.*  But  Baier  adds  that  God 
is  Himself  the  law. 

Jus'rtTiA  EXTERNA  is  the  term  that  is  used  to  express  the 
righteousness  of  God  in  its  narrow  and  specific  sense. 
Righteousness  in  a  broader  sense  is  understood  to  include 
all  the  moral  perfections  of  God.  In  the  narrow  sense  the 
righteousness  of  God  is  the  same  as  His  holiness  in  an  ex- 
ternal sense,  which  makes  laws.  Justitia  externa  is  divided 
in  the  following  way:  1)  Legislativa  or  antecedent,  by 
which  is  meant  God's  legislative  righteousness,  2)  judicialis, 
consequens  or  distributiva,  i.  e..  His  retributive  righteous- 
ness. This  latter  is  divided  as  follows:  a)  remuneratoria, 
or  the  remunerative  righteousness,  b)  punitiva,  or  the  puni- 
tive righteousness,  for  which  reason  God  is  said  to  become 
angry,  which  implies  the  righteous  reaction  of  God's  holi- 
ness against  sin. 

*  Part.  I,  Cap.  I,  §XXIII. 


60  TIIKOI.OOY. 

The  following  Scripture  passages  may  be  quoted :  "Ye 
shall  be  holy,  for  I  am  holy"  (Lev.  11:  45)  ;  "The  Holy  One 
in  Israel"  (Ezek.  39:  7)  ;  "And  provoked  the  Holy  One  of 
Israel"  (Ps.  78:  41)  ;  "As  your  heavenly  Father  is  perfect" 
(Matt.  5:  48)  ;  "Each  shall  receive  his  ov^n  reward  accord- 
ing to  his  labor"  (1  Cor.  3:8);  "After  thy  hardness  and 
impenitent  heart  thou  treasurest  up  for  thyself  wrath  in 
the  day  of  wrath  and  revelation  of  the  righteous  judgment 
of  God;  who  will  render  to  every  man  according  to  his 
works"  (Rom.  2:  5,  6).     Other  passages  could  be  cited. 

Many  objections  have  been  raised  against  the  righteous- 
ness of  God,  against  His  righteous  government,  against  His 
righteous  judgment,  and  some  have  desired  to  deny  the 
wrath  of  God  towards  sinners.  For  this  reason  they  have 
also  attacked  the  doctrine  of  substitutional  atonement.  They 
emphasize  the  love  of  God  at  the  cost  of  His  holiness  and 
righteousness  and  forget  that  God  is  holy  love,  that  He 
loves  Himself  as  the  Holy  One.  God  has  been  compared  to 
a  sinful  father,  who  forgives  His  children.  The  argument 
is  that  God  must  be  more  merciful  than  an  earthly  father. 
Indeed,  He  is  more  merciful,  but  He  is  not  sinful,  for  which 
reason  He  is  more  just.  The  love  of  God  does  not  encroach 
upon  His  righteousness,  nor  does  His  righteousness  limit 
His  love.  Both  attributes  function  according  to  their  own 
nature  and  characteristics.  We  must  remember  that  when 
God  is  forced  to  manifest  His  wrath  He  is  not  cruel.  Even 
the  punishments  of  hell  conform  to  an  infallible  justice, 
and  men  shall  some  day  acknowledge  the  righteousness  of 
God  as  they  now  acknowledge  His  love  and  mercy. 

Veracitas  or  truthfulness.  Baier  defines  veracity  as  that 
attribute  by  which  God  is  ever  constant  in  the  telling  of  the 
truth  and  in  the  keeping  of  His  promises.*  The  veracity 
of  God  is  the  correspondeyice  of  His  thought  with  His  es- 
sence, so  that  God  is  the  absolute  truth,  which  is  another 
acknowledged  definition. 

The  following  passages  may  be  quoted:  "For  Thy  loving 
kindness  is  great  unto  the  heavens,  and  thy  truth  unto  the 

*  Part.  I,  Cap.  I,  §XXIV. 


TTIF,    DIVIXR    ATTHinT'TKS.  61 

skies"  (Ps.  57:  10)  ;  "All  thy  commandments  are  faithful" 
(Ps.  119:  86)  ;  "Loving  kindness  and  truth  go  before  thy 
face"  (Ps.  89:  15)  ;  "He  that  hath  received  his  witness  hath 
set  his  seal  to  this  that  God  is  true"  (John  3 :  33)  ;  "In  hope 
of  eternal  life,  which  God,  who  cannot  lie,  promised  before 
times  eternal"  (Titus  1:2),  etc. 

b.    Attributes  of  Coyitact  or  Relative  Attributes. 

Amor  or  love.  Hollazius  defines  love  in  the  following 
manner:  "Amare  significat  velle  alicui  bonum."  Love  may 
be  understood  in  many  ways.  Granfelt*  combines  God's 
intra-essential  love  and  His  love  manifested  to  the  world 
and  defines  as  follows:  "That  attribute  by  which  God  eter- 
nally imparts  Himself  ad  intra  and  ad  extra." 

The  Scholastics  divide  love  as  follows:  1)  complacentia, 
or  that  God  loves  all  creatures,  in  other  words,  God's  general 
good-will,  2)  benevolentia  or  His  love  to  man,  3)  amicitia 
or  His  love  for  the  faithful. 

Scripture  passages :  "God  so  loved  the  world"  (John  3 : 
16) .  This  is  the  cardinal  passage  by  which  to  prove  God's 
general  love  to  men.  "Jehovah  loveth  the  righteous"  (Ps. 
146 :  8)  ;  of  Jesus  we  read :  "Having  loved  his  own  that  were 
in  the  world,  he  loved  them  unto  the  end"  (John  13 :  ] )  ; 
"He  that  loveth  me  shall  be  loved  of  my  Father,  and  I  will 
love  him,  and  will  manifest  myself  unto  him"  (John  14 :  21) . 
The  expressions  which  the  Lord  uses  concerning  the  faith- 
ful manifest  the  special  love  (amicitia)  which  He  has  for 
them,  such  as  betrothed,  bride,  flock,  fold,  a  beautiful  crown, 
a  kingly  diadem,  etc.  We  might  also  speak  of  an  amicitia 
specialis,  such  as  was  manifested  in  relation  to  such  as 
Enoch,  Abraham,  Moses,  Samuel,  David,  Peter,  James, 
John,  Lazarus,  etc. 

Love  manifests  itself  as  bonitas  or  goodness  toward  all 
creatures ;  gratia  or  grace  toward  sinners ;  misericordia,  or 
mercy  towards  sinners  in  their  wretchedness;  dementia,  or 
meekness,  mildness;  lo7iganimitas ,  or  long-suffering,  in 
which  love  manifests  itself  in  the  deferring  of  punishment, 

*  Kristlig  dogmatik,  Third  Ed.,  p.  91. 


62  TIIKOI.OC.Y. 

and  patientia,  or  patience,  which  bears  with  many  faults. 
We  should  always  use  the  expressions  correctly.  Bonitas 
or  goodness  refers  to  the  love  of  God  as  in  providence,  when 
the  sun  shines  on  all  and  the  rain  waters  the  fields  of  both 
good  and  wicked.  Grace  should  be  used  in  relation  to  sin- 
ners and  criminals.  Only  sinners  and  criminals  before  the 
law  of  God  need  grace  in  the  sense  of  pardon.  Mercy  is 
needed  on  account  of  the  consequences  of  sins  in  suffering, 
sickness  and  all  kinds  of  misery.  God  is  long-suffering  to- 
wards the  wicked  and  delays  punishment  in  order  to  give 
them  an  opportunity  to  repent  and  reform.  God  exercises 
patience  towards  the  pious  or  His  own  children  in  education 
and  correction  of  faults. 

Among  the  Scripture  passages  that  set  forth  love  from 
these  various  points  of  view  are  the  following :  "Jehovah  is 
good  to  all"  (Ps.  145:  9)  ;  "Where  sin  abounded,  grace  did 
abound  more  exceedingly"  (Rom.  5:  20)  ;  "Jehovah  is  mer- 
ciful and  gracious"  (Ps.  103:  8)  ;  "The  Father  of  mercies" 
(2  Cor.  1:  3)  "Endured  with  much  longsuffering  vessels  of 
wrath  fitted  unto  destruction"  (Rom.  9:  22);  "Slow  to 
anger,  and  abundant  in  lovingkindness"  (Ps.  103:  8); 
"For  he  is  kind  toward  the  unthankful  and  evil"  (Luke  6: 
35)  ;  "The  riches  of  his  goodness  and  forbearance  and  long- 
suffering"  (Rom.  2:4). 

FiDELiTAS,  or  fidelity,  is  that  attribute  by  which  God  con- 
tinues to  manifest  His  love  and  grace  until  the  object  has 
been  icon.  This  attribute  constitutes  the  external  side,  an 
opus  ad  extra,  of  God's  veracity.  "He  is  faithful  that  prom- 
ised" (Heb.  10:  23).  "But  the  Lord  is  faithful,  who  shall 
establish  you"  (2  Thess.  3:3). 

§6.    THE  TRINITY. 

By  reason  of  the  conception  of  the  absolute  personality, 
which  also  includes  the  qualitative  characteristic  that  God 
is  love,  we  must  come  to  the  conclusion  that  God  is  triune. 
Besides,  we  are  led  through  the  revelation  of  God's  economy 
to  the  conception  of  His  intra-essential  trinity.    The  follow- 


THE   TRINITY.  63 

ing  propositions  have  therefore  generally  been  accepted  in 
the  Christian  Church :  Dens  est  triniis,  h.  e.  i?i  essentia 
unus,  tres  habet  subsistendi  modos,  or  God  is  triune,  i.  e., 
one  in  essence  with  three  modes  of  subsistence;  una  divina 
essentia  in  tribus  personis  subsistis,  or  a  divine  essence 
subsists  in  three  persons.  There  are  therefore  three  in  one 
and  one  in  three  or  a  trinity  in  the  unity  and  a  unity  in  the 
trinity.  Apart  from  the  clear  presentation  of  the  Trinity 
in  the  Bible,  it  lies  in  the  intensive  and  exclusive  nature  of 
the  matter  that  God  cannot  be  one  person  in  the  ordinary 
sense,  inasmuch  as  love  demands  an  object.  According  to 
the  two  parts  of  the  unity  of  God  He  is  absolutely  perfect 
and  also  self-sufficient.  The  world  could  not  be  the  object 
of  God's  love,  for  this  would  conflict  with  His  perfection 
and  also  with  His  self-sufficiency.  These  essential  charac- 
teristics do  not  imply  that  there  are  only  two  persons  in  the 
divine  essence,  but  that  God,  who  is  one,  subsists  in  three 
persons  or  three  persons  in  one  essence  or  three  persons  in 
one  absolute  personality,  otherwise  there  would  be  lacking 
the  common  object  of  love,  which  at  the  same  time  unites 
and  distinguishes. 

The  human  reason  cannot  comprehend  the  mystery  of 
the  Trinity,  and  the  inadequate  terms  of  human  language 
cannot  express  the  content  of  this  mystery,  wherefore  rea- 
son must  give  way  to  the  obedience  of  faith,  forasmuch  as 
the  doctrine  of  the  Trinity  hag  a  firm  basis  in  the  Word  of 
God  and  finds  an  empirical  response  in  the  Christian  con- 
sciousness. But  faith  contains  knowledge,  and  the  Church 
correctly  maintains  that  it  is  her  duty  to  set  forth  what  can 
be  learned  concerning  this  important  doctrine. 

1.    The  Ordinary  Methods  of  Explanation. 

a.  Through  the  conceptioyi  of  the  absolute  perso7iality. 
Man  is  an  ego  which  reaches  self-consciousness  and  self- 
determination  in  opposition  to  a  thou.  Without  this  rela- 
tionship of  duality  we  could  not  speak  of  personality.  But 
the  ego  is  not  merely  a  relationship  of  duality,  i.  e.,  in  op- 


64  TIIKOI OCY. 

position  to  a  thou,  there  is  a  unity  likewise,  a  union  of  the 
ego  and  the  non-ego.  The  union  is  not  found,  however,  in 
a  person,  but  in  the  human  organizations  of  the  family, 
state  and  church. 

We  may  also  speak  of  a  threefold  ego:  the  substantial 
ego,  which  places  itself  before  itself  as  an  object,  the  ob- 
jective ego,  in  which  we  contemplate  ourselves  as  an  object, 
the  subjective  ego,  which  looks  upon  the  other  as  identical 
with  itself. 

Man  is  made  in  the  image  of  God ;  his  personality  is  rela- 
tive and  determined  by  something  outside  of  himself.  God 
is  absolute  and  infinite,  for  which  reason  the  dual  relation- 
ship is  found  in  His  own  essence,  as  well  as  the  union  which 
is  mediated  by  the  Spirit. 

b.  Through  the  conception  of  love.  Love  implies  self- 
impartation  between  persons.  Since  God  is  a  unity  and 
absolute  love.  He  must  therefore  include  within  Himself 
three  persons.  God  must  be  the  subject  and  the  object  of 
love.  Between  the  Father  and  the  Son  there  arises  a  recip- 
rocal activity  of  divine  love.  The  moving  power  or  force  in 
this  reciprocal  activity  is  common  to  both,  the  third  person, 
contemplated  and  loved  by  both,  who  constitutes  the  uniting 
bond  between  both  and  saves  them  from  losing  each  other, 
that  is,  each  in  Himself.  The  third  person  is  the  Spirit. 
As  triune  God  is  therefore  an  absolute  personality,  who  in 
Himself  lives  the  life  of  everlasting  love,  for  which  reason 
the  characteristics  of  His  essence  are  likewise  trinitarian, 
and  we  may  say  that  they  are  of  the  Father,  through  the 
Son,  and  in  the  Spirit.  It  follows  that  one  of  the  persons 
does  not  possess  the  whole  fulness  of  the  divine  essence  in- 
dependent of  the  others,  but  only  in  relation  to  one  another 
does  each  possess  the  divine  essence.  The  whole  essence 
is  in  each  person  undivided,  and  this  essence  is  the  one  God 
or  the  absolute  personality  subsisting  in  three  relative  per- 
sons. Each  one  of  them  is  the  absolute  personality  only  in 
a  special  relational  form.  This  does  not  imply,  however, 
that  the  absolute  personality  is  a  combination  of  three 
separate  persons  in  the  ordinary  sense,  for  the  persons  in 


THE   TRINITY.  65 

the  Trinity  are  not  absolute  per  se,  but  relatively,  and  sub- 
sist in  and  through  one  another.  From  the  conception  of 
the  absolute  personality  and  also  of  love  it  is  seen  that  the 
position  of  the  Spirit  in  the  Trinity  implies  an  element  of 
union  and  also  one  of  separation  or  distinction.  Emphasis 
must  be  laid  on  both  sides  of  this  relationship,  for  if  the 
emphasis  is  laid  on  the  former,  then  the  Spirit  becomes 
more  than  the  Father  and  the  Son,  not  to  say  the  whole 
essence ;  if  the  latter  is  emphasized,  then  the  position  of  the 
Spirit  becomes  simply  a  relation  between  the  Father  and 
the  Son. 

c.  Through  the  conception  of  the  atonement.  In  the  ex- 
perience of  the  atonement  there  is  a  difference  between  God, 
who  is  atoned,  God,  who  atones,  and  God,  through  whom 
the  atonement  is  applied. 

d.  By  the  use  of  ayialogy.  Hereby  are  meant  the  general 
analogies  that  have  been  presented  at  different  times.  How- 
ever, they  do  not  possess  any  scientific  value  as  proofs  of 
the  Trinity,  and  many  objections  could  be  raised  against 
them.  Among  analogies  of  this  sort  may  be  mentioned,  the 
root,  the  tree  and  the  fruit ;  the  sun,  rays  of  light,  and  heat ; 
length,  breadth  and  depth  in  space;  the  past,  present  and 
future  of  time ;  the  triangle  with  its  three  sides ;  the  per- 
sonal pronouns,  I,  thou  and  he;  the  subject,  the  predicate 
and  the  copula  of  a  sentence ;  the  noun  with  its  three  gen- 
ders; the  adjective  with  its  three  degrees  of  comparison. 
In  the  realm  of  man  there  are  better  analogies  which  still 
are  inadequate :  the  family,  consisting  of  man,  wife  and  chil- 
dren ;  the  body,  soul  and  spirit  of  man ;  the  intellect,  will 
and  emotions  of  the  mind.  These  analogies  simply  prove 
that  the  ideas  of  unity  and  trinity  are  not  foreign  to  our 
thought,  but  they  cannot  explain  the  Trinity.  The  analogy 
of  man  as  a  unit  of  intellect,  will  and  emotion  is  probably 
the  best,  especially  as  we  remember  that  we  are  created  in 
the  image  of  God,  but  the  analogy  does  not  explain  a  divine 
essence  and  the  three  persons. 

e.  Through  the  teaching  of  the  Word  of  God.  The  pres- 
entation of  the  Trinity  in  the  Bible  does  not  aim  to  solve  the 


66  THEOLOGY. 

problem  for  the  human  reason,  but  every  one  who  believes 
that  the  Scriptures  are  the  Word  of  God  can  become  con- 
vinced that  the  doctrine  of  the  Trinity  is  true.  The  declara- 
tions and  words  of  the  Bible  are  incontrovertible  proofs  of 
the  divine  Trinity,  if  it  can  be  shown  that  the  Scriptures 
clearly  teach  this  doctrine.  In  the  history  of  creation  God 
appears  as  more  than  one  person.  Elohim  created.  When 
we  compare  this  expression  with  John  1,  where  we  learn 
that  the  Son  of  God  created,  then  it  is  evident  that  Elohim 
includes  both  the  Father  and  the  Son.  But  when  we  also 
read  the  following  passages :  "By  the  word  of  Jehovah  were 
the  heavens  made,  and  all  the  host  of  them  by  the  breath  of 
his  mouth"  (Ps.  33:  6),  and  also,  "The  spirit  of  God  moved 
upon  the  face  of  the  waters"  (Gen.  1:2),  then  the  proof 
is  clear  that  Elohim  in  Gen.  1 :  1  must  imply  the  Father, 
Son  and  Spirit.  In  Gen.  1 :  26  we  read :  "And  God  said, 
Let  us  make  man."  This  cannot  be  explained  to  mean  that 
God  spoke  to  angels,  for  this  conflicts  with  the  story  of 
creation.  It  proves  that  the  Father,  Son  and  Spirit  spoke 
together.  The  Messiah  is  represented  as  the  Son  of  God, 
the  servant  of  God :  "Jehovah  said  unto  me.  Thou  art  my 
son ;  this  day  have  I  begotten  thee"  (Ps.  2:7);  "Behold,  m.y 
servant"  (Isa.  42:  1).  In  this  connection  servant  is  used 
in  a  higher  sense,  and  the  life-work  of  the  Son  of  God  is 
considered.  In  Isa.  9 :  6  He  is  called  God ;  also  in  Ps.  47 :  7. 
The  three  persons  of  the  Godhead  are  mentioned  in  Isa.  63. 
In  Isa.  48:  16  we  read:  "And  now  the  Lord  Jehovah  hath 
sent  me,  and  his  spirit."  The  following  passages  may  be 
cited  from  the  New  Testament:  "Into  the  name  of  the  Fa- 
ther and  of  the  Son  and  of  the  Holy  Spirit"  (Matt.  28 :  19)  ; 
"And  the  Word  was  with  God,  and  the  Word  was  God" 
(John  1:1);  "The  grace  of  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ,  and  the 
love  of  God,  and  the  communion  of  the  Holy  Spirit,  be  with 
you  all"  (2  Cor.  13:  14).  In  addition  there  could  be  cited 
many  passages  that  clearly  contain  the  doctrine  of  the  di- 
vinity of  Christ.  The  personality  of  the  Holy  Spirit  is  set 
forth  in  many  places.  Among  these  we  will  limit  ourselves 
to  the  quotation  of  only  one  passage,  where  the  Holy  Spirit 


THE  TRINITY.  67 

speaks  and  uses  the  first  person  of  the  pronoun :  "And  as 
they  ministered  to  the  Lord,  and  fasted,  the  Holy  Spirit 
said,  Separate  me  Barnabas  and  Saul  for  the  work  where- 
unto  I  have  called  them"  (Acts  13 :  2) .  Besides  many  other 
passages,  the  above  quotations  show  clearly  that  the  Bible 
contains  the  doctrine  of  the  Trinity. 

2.    Remarks  on  Terminology. 

Since  the  time  of  Athanasius  and  the  Gregorians  the  ex- 
pression ovaia  has  meant  the  djAdne  essence  common  to  all 
three  persons  of  the  Godhead.  Prior  to  that  time  the  use 
of  the  word  was  uncertain  and  the  definition  of  Aristotle 
was  accepted  that  an  essence  or  being  was  an  individual 
thing  or  an  ordinary  person.  But  the  Church  does  not  un- 
derstand by  essence  either  a  general  essence  or  substantia 
secunda  according  to  Aristotle,  for  God  is  represented  as 
an  absolute  personality  and  in  the  sense  of  a  substantia 
prima.  However,  since  the  Church  employs  the  expression 
ovata,  or  essence,  it  possesses  a  meaning,  which,  as  John 
of  Damascus  says,  is  far  above  the  ordinary  conception  of 
essence. 

The  expression  vTroaraa-i's,  or  person,  was  first  used  in  the 
same  sense  as  essence  is  now  used,  but  when  oia-^a  came  to 
be  used  to  designate  the  divine  essence,  then  wTroo-Tao-ts  came 
into  general  use  as  designating  the  persons  in  the  divine 
essence.  The  expression  cannot  be  understood  in  the  ordi- 
nary empirical  sense,  so  that  the  Father,  the  Son  and  the 
Spirit  should  be  like  three  distinct  persons. 

The  unity  in  the  divine  essence  is  numerical  and  not  one 
of  its  kind,  as  in  man.  In  man  the  essence  in  three  persons 
is  not  one  in  number  but  in  species.  Concerning  men  it 
cannot  be  said  that  one  is  in  the  other,  but  Jesus  says  in 
John  14 :  10 :  "I  am  in  the  Father.'  Furthermore,  it  cannot 
be  said  concerning  men  that  where  one  is,  there  the  other 
is  also,  because  they  are  locally  distinct;  but  the  Lord  says 
in  John  8:  29:  "He  that  hath  sent  me  is  with  me;  he  hath 
not  left  me  alone."     God  is  not  divided  into  three  persons, 


G8  TIIKOI.OCY. 

but  the  three  persons  share  the  divine  essence  indivisibly, 
so  that  each  one  possesses  the  divine  essence  without  multi- 
plication or  division.  It  is  therefore  not  a  plio'alitas  essen- 
tialis,  nor  a  phiralitas  accidentcdis,  for  personality  is  not 
something  that  is  temporarily  added  to  the  divine  essence, 
but  it  is  a  plMvalitas  hypostatica  sen  pei^sonarum.  There  is 
therefore  a  real  distinction,  but  not  in  a  human  v^^ay. 
Philippi  says  that  above  all  things  it  is  necessary  to  un- 
derstand in  w^hat  sense  the  Church  interprets  the  expres- 
sion person.  He  says  in  his  Glaubenslehre  II,  pp.  145 — 147 : 
"Personali^ty  is  found  only  where  self-consciousness  and 
freedom  are  found,  for  where  there  is  personality  it  mani- 
fests itself  in  self-consciousness  and  self-determination  or 
freedom.  But  in  itself  we  may  say  that  personality  is  some- 
thing deeper,  that  forms  the  foundation  of  self-conscious- 
ness and  self-determination,  the  real  inner  essence  which  is- 
reflected  in  the  two  forms  in  which  it  is  revealed.  In  man, 
and  especially  when  he  has  reached  perfect  spiritual  devel- 
opment, the  essence  and  manifestation  of  personality  cannot 
be  separated  from  each  other.  But  what  cannot  be  sepa- 
rated in  reality  can  be  distinguished  in  thought.  The 
ecclesiastical  terminology  has  been  based  upon  the  possi- 
bility of  this  conceptual  distinction  and  has  applied  the  one 
factor,  the  inner  essence  of  the  personality,  the  ego,  or  the 
independent  form  of  subsistence,  to  mean  the  true,  im- 
manent distinction  in  the  Godhead,  while,  on  the  other 
hand,  the  second  factor,  the  revealed  form  of  the  person- 
ality, the  self-consciousness  and  the  freedom  are  conceived 
of  as  the  predicate  of  the  one  divine  essence.  Therefore  the 
three  persons  in  the  Godhead  are  self-conscious  and  free 
subjects,  by  reason  of  their  communion  in  the  one,  self- 
conscious,  free  divine  essence,  which  reveals  itself  in  the 
three  persons  in  distinct  and  independent  forms  of  sub- 
sistence." Therefore  when  on  the  one  hand  we  emphasize 
the  absolute  personality,  we  express  our  antagonism  in  the 
first  place  to  Pantheism,  and  in  the  second  place  to  Sabel- 
lianism  and  Arianism  together  with  other  related  theories. 


THE  TIIINITY.  69 

'Oiioova-ia  constitutes  the  predicate  of  all  three  persons. 
Therefore  the  Son  and  the  Spirit  are  of  the  same  essence 
as  the  Father.  Wherefore  we  confess  in  the  Athanasian 
Creed :  "The  Godhead  of  the  Father,  of  the  Son,  and  of  the 
Holy  Ghost,  is  all  one :  the  glory  equal,  the  majesty  co- 
eternal.  Such  as  the  Father  is,  such  is  the  Son,  and  such 
is  the  Holy  Ghost.  And  in  the  Trinity  none  is  afore,  or 
after  the  other ;  none  is  greater,  or  less  than  another.  But 
the  whole  three  persons  are  co-eternal  together,  and  co- 
equal." 

Although  we  cannot  apprehend  God  or  attempt  to  do  it, 
we  have  the  right  to  present  what  the  Bible  teaches.  To 
those  who  believe  in  the  Biblical  statements  and  meditate 
on  them,  the  being  of  God  becomes  more  concrete.  It  is 
plain  that  the  Bible  teaches  the  unity  of  the  essence  of  God 
and  yet  speaks  of  three  distinctions.  It  is  Biblically  evident, 
therefore,  that  essence  and  persons  are  differently  under- 
stood. The  oneness  of  God  is  not  the  same  as  the  unity  of 
man,  and  the  different  persons  in  the  Godhead  are  not  three 
separate  persons  like  three  human  persons.  And  they  are 
not  confused  or  mixed,  because  each  relative  person  has  His 
own  consciousness  by  which  He  knows  that  He  is  not  the 
other  relative  person,  but  He  is  Himself.  The  Father  is  not 
the  Son,  the  Son  is  not  the  Father,  neither  of  these  two  is 
the  Holy  Spirit,  and  the  Holy  Spirit  is  Himself  and  not  the 
Father  or  the  Son,  but  all  three  know  that  they  are  one, 
having  the  same  undivided  essence  and  consequently  one 
self-consciousness  and  one  self-determination.  Notice  again 
what  we  quoted  from  Philippi  :  ''The  ego,  or  the  inde- 
pendent form  of  subsistence,  means  the  real,  immanent  dis- 
tinction in  the  Godhead,  while  on  the  other  hand  the  second 
factor,  the  revealed  form  of  the  personality,  the  self-con- 
sciousness and  freedom  (self-determination)  are  conceived 
of  as  the  predicate  of  the  one  divine  essence."  The  three 
relative  'egos'  or  relative  persons,  who  have  a  consciousness 
of  their  own,  constitute  one  and  are  one  self -consciousness 
and  one  self-determination,  which  is  the  same  as  one  God 
or  one  Absolute  Personality.     Apparently  or  superficially 


70  TiiEor.ocv. 

considered  it  looks  as  if  man  had  an  advantage  in  possessing 
his  own  self-consciousness,  but  a  closer  view  reveals  the 
plenitude  of  God  as  trinal  unity.  The  unity  of  God  eternally 
exists  as  trinality,  three  in  one  and  one  in  three.  But  the 
three  persons  do  not  exist  within  the  one  essence  as  the 
fourth.  Neither  does  the  trinitarian  person  exist  as  a  part 
of  the  one  essence.  The  three  persons  possess  simultane- 
ously the  whole  divine  essence.  The  divine  essence  subsists 
eternally  and  permanently  in  three  modes,  but  not  succes- 
sively, as  the  Sabellians  taught.  Paul  speaks  of  "the  form 
of  God"  (ixopcfyrj).  The  divine  essence  subsists  in,  three  forms, 
each  form  or  relative  person  being  the  essence  or  substance 
of  the  others,  both  numerically  and  identically.  But  two  or 
three  human  persons,  like  Peter,  John  and  James,  although 
having  the  same  kind  of  nature,  have  not  the  same  nature 
or  substance  numerically  and  identically,  because  each  hu- 
man person  is  a  fractional  part  of  the  human  nature.  The 
personality  of  God  is  therefore  richer  than  an  ordinary 
person.  God  was  self-sufficient  before  other  persons  were 
created  and  blessed  in  Himself.  There  is  no  adequate 
analogy  to  make  the  Trinity  concrete  to  our  vision.  If  a 
triplex  mirror  would  produce  three  images  of  one  person- 
ality containing  all  in  each  and  each  having  its  own  pecu- 
liarity, this  would  be  a  mental  analogy.  Or  if  three  persons 
could  be  conceived  of  as  having  the  same  undivided  soul,  it 
would  also  give  an  idea.  In  His  manifestation  God  does 
not  appear  as  one  person,  as  we  can  deduce  from  the  mani- 
festations related  in  the  Bible.  At  the  Baptism  of  Christ 
there  were  three  personal  manifestations,  although  only 
the  voice  of  the  Father  was  heard  and  the  Holy  Ghost  ap- 
peared in  the  form  of  a  dove,  but  the  Second  Person  of  the 
Godhead  in  His  incarnation  was  visible  to  all.  In  heaven 
we  will  see  the  incarnated  Son  of  God  in  a  glorified  body. 
It  is  then  evident  that  God  the  Father  and  God  the  Holy 
Spirit  will  also  appear  as  persons  in  manifestation.  The 
omnipresence  of  God  is  not  affected  by  these  manifesta- 
tions, as  the  omnipresence  of  the  divine  essence  is  not  local 
or  circumscribed.     From  revelation  or  the  Bible  we  learn 


THE   THINITY.  71 

that  the  three  divine  persons  are  objective  to  each  other. 
The  manifestation  of  God  is  not  like  a  mathematical  unit. 
There  are  many  actions  of  the  relative  divine  persons  v^hich 
prove  their  relative  objectivity  to  each  other.  One  divine 
person  loves  another,  addresses  another,  is  the  way  to  an- 
other, suffers  from  another,  sends  another,  glorifies  another, 
etc.  But  on  the  other  hand,  on  account  of  the  unity,  there 
are  not  three  almighty,  but  one  almighty,  etc.  If  we  pray 
to  one,  we  pray  to  all  the  persons  in  the  Trinity.  In  the 
Lord's  Prayer  our  Father  is  not  the  first  person  only,  but 
the  triune  God,  our  providential  Father.  We  cannot  speak 
to  one  of  the  persons  to  the  exclusion  of  the  others.  They 
dwell  in  one  another  and  work  together  according  to  the 
order  stated  in  the  Economical  Trinity. 

Uepix(opr]aL<;  implies  a  common  and  peculiar  indwelling,  so 
that  the  one  is  in  the  other,  by  which  we  can  understand 
that  the  three  persons  do  not  subsist  separately  or  by  the 
side  of  each  other.  Also  they  are  alike,  so  that  the  Father 
is  not  God  in  a  higher  sense  than  the  Son  and  the  Holy 
Ghost.  As  is  already  mentioned,  the  persons  are  absolute 
only  in  a  relative  sense  and  together  constitute  the  absolute 
personality.  The  Son  of  God  says:  "I  and  the  Father  are 
one"  (John  10:  30)  ;  ''Believe  me  that  I  am  in  the  Father, 
and  the  Father  in  me"  (John  14:  11)  ;  "As  thou,  Father, 
art  in  me,  and  I  in  thee"  (John  17:  21). 

But  as  the  persons  are  relatively  distinct,  so  there  exists 
a  certain  order  in  their  internal  relationship  and  in  their 
manifestation ;  for  which  reason  they  have  their  distinct 
characteristics  and  work. 

The  term  mcommuyiicahilis  is  therefore  used  to  explain 
that  that  by  which  the  one  divine  person  is  distinguished 
from  the  others  cannot  be  transferred  from  the  one  to  the 
other.  The  common  name  given  to  the  characteristics  that 
separate  one  person  from  the  other  is  character  hypostaticiis. 


72  TIIEOI.OCIY. 

3.    Divisions. 
I.     The  Ontological  Tinnity. 

By  this  is  meant  the  Trinity  when  considered  from  the 
intra-essential  viewpoint.  Here  belong  the  inner  charac- 
teristics or  notae  internae,  which  constitute  the  modus  sub- 
sistendi  or  Tpö-n-o-;  vTrdpéco)<i ,  by  which  the  persons  are  distin- 
guished from  one  another  in  their  ontological  relationship. 

A.  Actus  pei'sonales  or  the  personal  acts.  These  are  also 
called  opera  ad  intra,  which  are  divisa,  divided  or  incom- 
munia.  They  are :  a)  generatio  (opus  Patris) ,  that  the 
Father  from  eternity  begets  the  Son.  This  is  therefore  the 
Father's  opus  ad  intra;  b)  spiratio  activa  (opus  Patris  et 
Filii)  is  the  opus  ad  intra  by  which  the  Father  and  the  Son 
simultaneously  as  an  eternal  principle  send  forth  the  Holy 
Spirit. 

Generatio  and  also  spiratio  are  described  especially  by 
the  following  negative  and  positive  terms:  1)  non  meta^ 
phorica  et  accidentalis  et  impropria,  sed  vera,  substantialis 
et  propria,  for  the  generation  is  not  metaphorical,  neither 
is  it  accidental  or  improper,  but  true  and  substantial.  The 
Son  is  the  substantial  image  of  the  Father;  2)  non  phijsica, 
sed  hy  per  phijsica,  because  the  natural  birth  of  man  is  not 
a  real  analogy,  although  the  expression  birth  is  the  only 
relatively  adequate  human  expression  that  can  be  used  to 
set  forth  the  activity  of  the  Father  in  producing  the  Son; 
3)  non  voluntaria,  sed  necessaria,  since  the  generation  is 
not  dependent  upon  a  preceding  act  of  the  Father's  will,  but 
was  necessary  and  conformed  to  the  nature  of  God;  4)  non 
temporalis,  sed  asterna.  If  the  generation  were  not  eternal, 
then  it  would  have  had  a  beginning  and  an  end  and  in  such 
case  the  Son  would  not  be  eternal.  Quenstedt  says  there- 
fore, that  the  Father  from  eternity  begat,  and  always  be- 
gets, and  never  will  cease  to  beget  His  Son.  Nevertheless, 
this  generation  cannot  be  said  for  this  reason  to  be  imper- 
fect and  successive,  for  the  act  of  generation  in  the  Father 
of  the  Son  is  considered  perfect  in  work  and  constant  in 
operation.     We  must  divest  ourselves  of  all  thoughts  of 


THE  TRINITY.  73 

human  analogies  concerning  conception,  birth  and  time. 
Both  the  Father  and  the  Son  are  eternal,  and  the  Holy  Spirit 
is  eternal.  There  is  an  eternal  communication  of  one  and 
tEe  same  essence.  The  Father  could  not  exist  without  the 
Son,  nor  without  the  Holy  Spirit.  However,  a  relative 
order  exists  among  the  persons,  so  that  the  Father,  who 
has  life  in  Himself,  is  named  first,  the  Son,  whom  the  Father 
begets  from  eternity,  is  the  second  person  in  the  Godhead, 
and  the  Holy  Spirit,  who  is  sent  forth  both  by  the  Father 
and  the  Son,  is  the  third  person.  By  reason  of  the  idea  of 
eternity,  however,  there  is  no  priority,  which  would  imply 
the  existence  of  one  person  before  the  other.  There  is  no 
perfect  analogy  to  explain  this  primitive  simultaneous  ex- 
istence. QUENSTEDT  presents  the  analogy  of  the  sun  and 
its  rays;  5)  non  externa,  sed  intima,  since  it  is  a  generation 
that  occurs  within  the  essence  of  the  Godhead  and  a  peri- 
choresis.  The  Son  is  in  the  bosom  of  the  Father,  according 
to  John  1 :  18. 

That  the  Father  and  the  Son  send  forth  the  Holy  Spirit, 
or  that  the  Holy  Spirit  proceeds  from  the  Father  and  the 
Son,  is  presented  in  the  symbols  of  the  Church  in  complete 
harmony  with  the  teachings  of  the  Word  of  God.  If  the 
Son  did  not  send  forth  the  Spirit  as  does  the  Father,  then 
He  would  be  less  than  the  Father. 

The  internal  ^activities  in  the  ontological  Trinity  are 
eternal  and  unceasing.  The  personal  acts  as  stated  are  two. 
They  are  the  etern^al  generation  and  spiration,  and  when 
viewed  in  respect  to  the  result  these  activities  are  called 
filiation  and  procession.  These  acts  are  not  creative,  be- 
cause all  the  three  persons  are  eternal  and  equal.  The  acts 
do  not  add  anything  to  the  divine  essence,  but  modify  eter- 
nally the  existing  eternal  essence.  The  eternal  begetting, 
not  being  like  a  physical  conception  and  birth,  is  like  a 
communication  of  the  whole  undivided  divine  essence  by 
the  Father  to  the  Son.  Some  Trinitarians  use  the  term 
"emanation"  which  may  be  an  analogy  in  opera  ad  intra, 
but  not  in  opera  ad  extra.  When  God  created  the  world, 
He  made  a  new  substance  from  nothing  and  it  was  not  an 


74  THEOLOGY. 

emanation  of  the  divine  essence  in  a  gnostic  sense.  But  the 
internal  and  eternal  generation  of  the  Son  may  be  like  an 
emanation  of  the  divine  essence  by  the  activity  of  the  Fa- 
ther. The  Nicene  Trinitarians,  like  Athanasius,  use  figures 
such  as  these :  The  community  of  the  Father  and  the  Son 
is  like  light  and  brightness,  fountain  and  stream,  the  solar 
substance  and  the  rays;  and  yet  the  sun  and  the  brightness 
are  not  the  same.  The  Father  in  begetting  the  Son  did  not 
exist  before,  because  then  the  Son  would  not  be  eternal. 
The  Father  and  Son  coexisted.  The  same  is  the  case  in 
spiration.  The  spiration  is  eternal.  The  Father  as  unbe- 
gotten  is  not  superior  or  older,  but  in  the  Trinitarian  process 
of  eternal  existence  the  Father  is  the  first  in  the  order  of 
process,  but  not  in  time.  The  eternal  and  internal  life- 
movement  necessarily  required  an  originating  process.  In 
John  we  read :  "For  as  the  Father  hath  life  in  himself,  even 
so  gave  he  to  the  Son  also  to  have  life  in  himself"  (John 
5:  26).  When  God  in  His  all-wisdom  decided  to  use  the 
terms  Father  and  Son,  it  is  self-evident  that  the  Father 
must  be  first  in  order.  A  subordination  of  person  is  not  a 
subordination  of  essence.  The  Arian  and  Semi-Arian  sub- 
ordination concerns  the  essence  and  also  the  person.  Neither 
should  we  confound  the  subordination  of  Christ  in  His  state 
of  humiliation  with  the  order  of  persons  in  the  Trinity. 
Here  the  question  is  only  one  of  order  in  the  Trinity.  The 
Father  must  be  first,  the  Son  the  second,  and  the  Holy  Spirit 
the  third.  It  relates  to  characteristics  of  paternity,  filiation 
and  procession.  Compare  the  Athanasian  symbol.  The 
three  relative  persons  all  have  the  same  eternal  essence  in 
common,  without  division  and  with  equal  majesty. 

In  regard  to  the  Third  Person  or  Hypostasis  He  is  not 
more  spirit  than  the  Father  and  the  Son,  The  Holy  Spirit 
is  called  Spirit  on  account  of  the  mode  in  which  the  divine 
essence  is  communicated  to  Him.  He  is  denominated  Holy, 
because  in  the  application  of  salvation  He  works  holiness  in 
men.  He  is  not  begotten,  as  in  the  divine  eternal  wisdom 
there  should  be  only  one  Son.  The  diff"erence  between  gene- 
ration, spiration  and  procession  is  ineffable.     The  Father 


THE   TRINITY.  75 

and  Son  spirate  the  Spirit  and  the  Spirit  proceeds  from  the 
Father  and  Son.  By  this  internal  process  the  one  undivided 
essence  is  modified  as  the  Third  Hypostasis.  The  Spirit  is 
called  the  Spirit  of  the  Son  just  as  of  the  Father.  "God 
sent  forth  the  Spirit  of  his  Son"  (Gal.  4 :  6)  ;  "The  Spirit 
of  Jesus  Christ"  (Phil.  1:  19).  In  the  application  of  salva- 
tion we  experience  the  Spirit  in  the  first  place  and  through 
the  Spirit  we  know  Christ  and  through  the  Son,  Jesus 
Christ,  we  know  the  Father.  In  our  spiritual  experience 
the  name  Holy  Spirit  becomes  clearer  in  the  knowledge  of 
the  Father  and  the  Son  from  whom  the  Spirit  is  spirated. 

Among  the  Scripture  passages  that  set  forth  the  genera- 
tion of  the  Son  and  the  sending  forth  of  the  Spirit  by  the 
Father  and  Son,  the  following  ntay  be  cited:  "Thou  art  my 
son;  this  day  have  I  begotten  thee"  (Ps.  2:7;  Heb.  1:5; 
5:  5)  ;  compare  other  passages  where  the  eternity  of  the 
Son  is  set  forth :  Isa.  9 :  6  (everlasting  Father,  literally, 
Father  of  eternity)  ;  Heb.  7:3;  John  8 :  58 ;  17 :  5.  "And 
the  witness  is  this,  that  God  gave  unto  us  eternal  life,  and 
this  life  is  in  his  Son"  (1  John  5:  11),  etc.  "But  when  the 
Comforter  is  come,  whom  I  will  send  unto  you  from  the  Fa- 
ther, he  shall  bear  witness  of  me"  (John  15:  26)  ;  "He  shall 
take  of  mine,  and  shall  declare  it  unto  you"  (John  16:  14)  ; 
"Spirit  of  Christ"  (Rom.  8:9);  "And  because  ye  are  sons, 
God  sent  forth  the  Spirit  of  his  Son"  (Gal.  4:6). 

B.  Proprietates  personales  or  the  personal  attributes. 
These  attributes  are  based  upon  actus  personales,  but  are 
called  personal  attributes  because  they  describe  the  inner 
distinction  that  charaterizes  each  person.  They  are  the 
following :  paternitas  or  generans  (generating) ,  in  relation 
to  the  Father,  filiatio  or  genitus  (generated),  in  relation  to 
the  Son,  and  processio  or  procedens  (going  forth)  in  rela- 
tion to  the  Spirit. 

C.  Notiones  personalen,  or  the  personal  characteristics. 
These  are  abstracted  from  the  personal  acts  and  attributes 
and  express  in  the  form  of  concepts  the  inner  character- 
istics, by  which  the  divine  persons  are  distinguished  from 
one  another.    The  following  are  the  characteristics:  1)  with 


76  THEOLOGY. 

regard  to  the  Father:  iunascibilitaH  ( aytwrjai'a) ,  paternitcui 
et  spiratio  activa;  2)  with  regard  to  the  Son:  filiatio  (gene- 
ratio  passiva)  et  spiratio  activa;  3)  with  regard  to  the  Holy 
Spirit :  processio  et  spiratio  passiva. 

II.    The  Economical  Trinity. 

Under  this  head  are  discussed  the  external  characteristics 
or  notae  externae,  which  constitute  the  t/joVos  u7roKuAi;>€w? 
of  the  persons,  and  by  which  they  are  distinguished  from 
each  other  in  their  relation  to  the  world,  or  in  opera  ad 
extra,  which  are  indivisa  or  communia  '(common).  These 
opera  ad  extra  belong  to  each  person  of  the  Godhead,  but 
in  the  order  that  is  peculiar  to  each.  Although  it  may  be 
said  concerning  God  that  ^1  things  are  of  Him,  and  through 
Him,  and  unto  Him,  yet  the  following  particulse  discriticae 
are  used,  €k  of  the  Father,  8ta  of  the  Son,  and  ev  of  the 
Holy  Spirit.    Opera  ad  extra  are  divided  as  follows: 

A.  Oper'a  oeconomica  or  the  economical  acts.  These  are 
personalia  and  minus  communia  or  minus  indivisa. 

a.  The  Father  determined  upon  the  redemption,  which 
therefore  includes  election,  and  He  gave  the  Son.  "And  we 
have  beheld  and  bear  witness  that  the  Father  hath  sent  the 
Son  to  be  the  Saviour  of  the  world"  (1  John  4:  14)  ;  "Fear 
not,  little  flock ;  for  it  is  your  Father's  good  pleasure  to  give 
you  the  kingdom"  (Luke  12:  32)  ;  "He  spared  not  his  own 
Son,  but  delivered  him  up  for  us  all"  (Rom.  8:  32). 

b.  The  Son  has  performed  the  work  of  redemption,  which 
therefore  presupposes  the  incarnation.  "Even  as  the  Son 
of  man  came  not  to  be  ministered  unto,  but  to  minister,  and 
to  give  his  life  a  ransom  for  many"  (Matt.  20:  28)  ;  "And 
the  Word  became  flesh"  (John  1:  14),  etc. 

c.  The  Holy  Spirit  applies  reconciliation  or  redemption. 
"No  man  can  say,  Jesus  is  Lord,  but  in  the  Holy  Spirit"  (1 
Cor.  12:  3)  ;  "God  chose  you  from  the  beginning  unto  sal- 
vation in  sanctification  of  the  Spirit"  (2  Thess.  2:  13),  etc. 

B.  Opera  attribntira  or  the  attributive  acts.  They  are 
communia  or  indivisa,  and  yet  different  acts  are  ascribed 
to  each  person,  by  which  they  are  distinguished. 


THE  TBINITY.  77 

a.  To  the  Father  are  ascribed  creation  and  providence. 
"Have  we  not  all  one  father?  hath  not  one  God  created  us?" 
(Mai.  2:  10)  ;  "Yet  to  us  there  is  one  God,  the  Father,  of 
whom  are  all  things"  (1  Cor.  8:6);  "He  careth  for  you" 
(1  Peter  5:  7). 

b.  To  the  Son  are  ascribed  the  raising  of  the  dead  and 
the  judgment.  "The  dead  shall  hear  the  voice  of  the  Son 
of  God ;  and  they  that  hear  shall  live.  And  he  gave  him 
authority  to  execute  judgment,  because  he  is  the  son  of 
man.  Marvel  not  at  this :  for  the  hour  cometh,  in  which  all 
that  are  in  the  tombs  shall  hear  his  voice"  (John  5  :  25 — 28) . 

c.  To  the  Holy  Spirit  is  ascribed  inspiration :  "For  no 
prophecy  ever  came  by  the  will  of  man :  but  men  spake  from 
God,  being  moved  by  the  Holy  Spirit"  (2  Peter  1 :  21) . 

4.    Notes  on  the  History  of  Dogma. 

The  primitive  Church  accepted  the  doctrine  of  the  Trin- 
ity, but  the  doctrine 'underwent  development  a  little  at  a 
time  and  became  more  precisely  defined  by  reason  of  the 
controversies  that  arose  concerning  it.  During  the  Apolo- 
getical  period  the  words  rptas  and  trinitas  were  used  for 
the  first  time,  the  former  by  Theophilus  and  the  latter  by 
Tertullian.  Origen  taught  the  eternal  generation  of  the 
Son.  The  doctrine  of  the  Trinity  was  given  relatively  final 
definition  during  the  Polemical  period  through  the  Councils 
of  Nicaea  and  Constantinople  on  account  of  the  Arian,  Mace- 
donian and  related  controversies.  During  this  time  the 
expressions  6ixoova[a  and  Trepixw/Dr/o-i?  came  into  permanent  use. 
The  expression  filioque  was  added  to  the  Constantinopolitan 
Creed.  The  speculative  development  of  the  doctrine  of  the 
Trinity  began  at  this  time  and  continued  during  the  Scho- 
lastic period.  The  controversy  concerning  the  Holy  Spirit 
was  also  continued,  without  resulting,  however,  in  any  spe- 
cial dogmatic  definition.  At  the  time  of  the  Reformation 
the  Trinity  was  deduced  from  the  religious  experience  of 
the  atonement,  and  there  was  no  tendency  toward  specula- 
tive treatment,  at  any  rate  not  so  much  in  the  Lutheran 


78  THKOI.OGY. 

Church.  During  the  Reformation  and  Protestant  Scholastic 
period  the  true  doctrine  was  established  through  the  con- 
troversies with  the  Anti-Trinitarians  of  the  time.  The 
dogmatic  terms  w^re  increased  in  number  and  more  care- 
fully defined.  The  modern  critical  period  is  not  distin- 
guished by  the  production  of  any  dogmas,  although  specula- 
tive and  philosophical  expositions  have  not  been  wanting. 
Orthodox  dogmatics  has  been  compelled  to  combat  philo- 
sophical Anti-Trinitarianism  and  Unitarianism  in  various 
forms.  We  wish  now  to  present  some  special  quotations 
and  notes,  which  set  forth  the  history  of  the  dogma  during 
the  various  periods. 

Clement  of  Rome  speaks  of  the  Father,  Christ  and  the  Spirit  and 
also  sets  forth  the  unity  in  tlie  economical  activity.  He  presents  the 
divinity  and  pre-existence  of  Christ.  Ignatius  confesses  the  Father, 
Son  and  Holy  Spirit  and  calls  Christ  God.  The  Ebionites  did  not  ac- 
knowledge the  Trinity  and  denied  the  supernatural  birth  of  Christ. 
At  His  baptism  He  received  divine  powers.  Some  Ebionites  also  taught 
that  God  immediately  brought  forth  the  man,  who  received  the  Mes- 
sianic spirit.  They  likewise  taught  that  this  spirit  had  been  present 
in  others,  such  as  Abraham  and  Moses.  The  Nazarenes  did  not  deny 
the  supernatural  birth,  but  did  not  acknowledge  the  hypostatical  pre- 
existence  of  Christ's  divine  nature,  holding  that  at  baptism  God,  the 
source  of  all  holy  spirit,  united  Himself  with  the  human  personality 
of  Jesus. 

Justin  Mautyk  is  the  first  to  emphasize  the  word  generation  with 
regard  to  the  relationship  between  the  Father  and  Son.  The  genera- 
tion of  the  Son  was  an  act  of  the  will.  It  was  to  the  Son,  who  was 
born  before  all  creatures,  that  the  Father  said:  Let  us  make  man.  He 
also  speaks  of  the  Spirit.  Thkovhii.v.s  of  Antioch  was  the  first  to  use 
the  expression  Tptas  of  the  Trinity.  He  speaks  of  Aoyoq  ei'Staoeros  and 
Trpo<f)opLK6<;  and  calls  the  Spirit  croc^ta.  Before  we  continue  we  must 
mention  the  three  different  kinds  of  Monarchians:  the  Dynamists,  the 
Patripassians  and  the  Modalists.  The  dynamistic  Monarchians  re- 
garded the  Father  as  a  divine  person,  but  considered  the  Son  and  the 
Spirit  as  divine  powers.  The  founder  of  the  so-called  Dynamists  was 
Tiieodotus  the  Tanner,  who  said  that  Jesus  was  a  mere  man  who 
had  been  endued  with  special  divine  power.  Tiieodotit.s  the  Money- 
ciiANOEK  belonged  to  the  same  school  and  taught  that  Jesus  at  His 
birth  was  the  recipient  of  special  power  from  Logos  or  God.  To  this 
school  also  belonged  ArmcMON.  The  most  distinguished  representative 
was  Paii.  of  Samosata.  He  speaks  of  logos  endiathetos  and  prophori- 
kos,  but  the   latter  was  merely  an   impersonal  power.     The  power  of 


THE  TRINITY.  79 

the  Logos  was  united  with  Jesus,  a  mere  man,  who  nevertheless  was 
supernaturally  conceived  and  born  of  a  virgin.  The  personality  of 
Jesus  was  not  determined  by  the  Logos,  but  by  His  human  nature. 
The  Patripassians  taught  that  the  Father  had  become  man  and  suf- 
fered. The  most  prominent  representatives  of  this  school  of  thought 
were  Praxeas,  Noetus  and  Beryllus  of  Bostra.  Beuylltjs  of  Bostra.  in 
Arabia,  held  that  Christ  did  not  pre-exist  as  distinct  from  the  Father, 
but  became  a  separate  person  by  incarnation.  He  inclined  to  the  views 
of  Modalism  and  Sabellianism.  Eitsehhs  presents  his  view  in  the 
following  way:  "Beryl  attempted  to  introduce  certain  new  articles  of 
faith,  daring  to  say  that  our  Saviour  and  Lord  did  not  pre-exist  ac- 
cording" to  His  own  form  of  being  before  His  coming  among  men,  and 
that  He  did  not  possess  a  divinity  of  His  own,  but  only  that  of  the 
Father  committed  to  Him."  —  The  modalistic  Monarchianism  was 
completely  developed  by  Sabellius.  According  to  his  view  the  eternal 
divine  unity,  which  admits  of  no  distinctions,  had  appeared  in  three 
modes  or  phases  of  development.  These  were  the  Father,  Son  and 
Spirit.  They  were  not  persons,  but  personifications.  First  God  ap- 
peared as  Father,  and  when  His  work  was  finished  He  withdrew,  and 
then  appeared  as  Son  and  finally  as  Holy  Spirit.  Tertulliax  defended 
the  hypostatical  pre-existence  of  the  Logos  and  used  the  word  Son. 
He  also  set  forth  the  personality  of  the  Spirit.  He  said,  however,  that 
the  Spirit  was  subordinated  to  the  Son  and  the  Son  to  the  Father, 
although  he  thought  especially  of  the  order  and  the  gradation  (tres 
non  statu,  sed  gradu).  He  taught  a  threefold  filiatio:  1)  the  eternal 
one  in  the  mind  of  God,  2)  the  appearance  at  creation,  and  3)  the 
incarnation  of  the  Son.  He  sought  to  explain  the  Trinity  by  the 
process  of  self-consciousness  and  also  used  the  analogy  of  the  root, 
trunk  and  fruit  of  the  tree.  Origex  taught  the  eternal  generation  of 
the  Son,  but  took  the  position  that  the  Son  was  subordinate  to  the 
Father.  The  Father  was  God  in  Himself,  but  the  source  of  the  Son's 
divinity  was  in  the  Father. 

DioNYsius  OF  Alexandria  was  led  astray  in  the  beginning  and  gave 
utterance  to  expressions  that  implied  that  the  Father  was  as  much 
a  stranger  to  the  Son  as  a  shipbuilder  to  the  ship,  or  that  the  Son  was 
absolutely  distinct  from  the  Father.  Dionysius  of  Rome  opposed  the 
former  and  used  the  term  homousios  to  express  the  essential  relation- 
ship between  the  Father  and  the  Son.  This  expression  was  afterwards 
used  as  adequately  setting  forth  that  relationship.  Arius  said  that 
inasmuch  as  the  Son  was  born,  there  was  a  time  when  He  was  not. 
He  was  careful,  however,  not  to  use  the  word  time;  his  expression 
was  literally:  There  was,  when  the  Son  was  not.  Afterwards  he  said 
that  the  Son  was  created  out  of  nothing,  and  that  therefore  He  was 
not  of  like  essence  with  the  Father.  He  seems  also  to  have  considered 
the  Spirit  as  less  than  the  Son.  Aetius  and  Eunomius  developed 
Arianism  and  taught  that  the  Son  was  of  a  different  essence  from  the 


80  THEOLOUT. 

Fathor,  and  the  terra  éTc/jouVto?  came  into  use.  The  Srmi-A7-ians,  such 
as  Basil  ok  A.ncyka  and  Gkokcie  ok  Laodicea,  said  that  the  Son  was 
born  of  the  Father  and  used  the  term  6/u.oiow(s,  wherefore  they  were 
called  HomuiuH'Jdiis.  Eiskhu's  ok  Cksakka  taught  that  the  Father 
preceded  the  Son  as  a  cause,  for  which  reason  the  Son  is  not  eternal 
in  an  absolute  sense.  He  is  not  God  in  the  highest  and  primary  sense, 
but  in  a  secondary  sense.  He  denies  the  eternally  unceasing  genera- 
tion of  the  Son,  and  looks  upon  the  generation  as  having  been  com- 
pleted in  one  act.  The  Holy  Spirit  was  subordinate  to  the  Father  and 
the  Son.  Makcklias  of  Axt  yha  denied  the  hypostatical  pre-existence 
of  the  Son.  The  man  Jesus  became  the  Son  of  God  in  this  wise,  that 
the  Logos  united  Himself  with  Him.  Logos  was  not  born  and  was 
just  as  eternal  as  the  Father.  Before  the  creation  of  the  world  God 
was  silent,  but  at  the  creation  Logos  appeared  as  drastic  power,  but 
was  not  personal.  Athanasius,  who  defended  the  divinity  of  Christ, 
taught  likewise  that  the  Spirit  was  of  the  same  essence  as  the  Father. 
The  Father,  the  Son,  and  the  Spirit  are  three  distinct  modes  of  ex- 
istence in  God.  Basil  the  Great  said  that  the  Father,  Son  and  Spirit, 
although  alike  in  essence,  are  nevertheless  so  distinct  that  the  one 
is  not  the  other.  They  are  considered  in  and  with  each  other.  Cyril 
OF  Jerusalem  taught  the  eternal  generation  of  the  Son  and  the  per- 
sonality of  the  Spirit.  Both  Gregory  of  Naziansus  and  Gregory  of 
Nyssa  taught  the  divinity  of  the  three  persons.  The  latter  set  forth 
that  the  idea  of  plurality  does  not  belong  to  the  essence  but  to  the 
hypostases,  since  the  essence  is  not  divided  into  persons.  The  persons 
stand  in  the  most  intimate  relationship  to  each  other  and  constitute 
a  unity.  From  this  time  the  terms  ovaia  and  {iTroo-raats  came  to  be 
used  to  designate  essence  and  person  respectively.  Augistine  devel- 
oped the  essential  unity  of  the  Son  and  the  Spirit  with  the  Father. 
He  placed  the  divine  monad  not  in  the  person  of  the  Father,  but  in 
the  divine  essence.  He  compared  the  three  persons  to  the  memory, 
the  intellect  and  the  will.  He  likewise  represented  the  Trinity  as 
amans,  quod  amatur  and  mutuus  amor.  He  also  uses  the  figure  of 
cause,  means  and  end.  Concerning  the  Holy  Spirit,  he  taught  that  the 
Spirit  proceeds  both  from  the  Father  and  the  Son.  By  reason  of  the 
authority  of  Augustine  the  expression  filioque  was  added  to  the  Con- 
stantinopolitan  Creed  at  Toledo,  589.  —  At  Constantinople  in  381  the 
heresy  of  Macedonius  was  rejected.  Maceoonifs  taught  that  the  Spirit 
was  created  by  the  Father  through  the  Son.  His  disciples  said  that 
the  Spirit  must  either  be  born  or  unborn.  If  He  were  born,  then  He 
would  be  either  the  son  or  the  grandson  of  the  Father;  if  He  were 
unborn,  then  there  would  be  two  primitive  essences.  At  the  second 
Ecumenical  Council  in  381  it  was  decided  that  the  Holy  Spirit  proceeds 
from  the  Father,  should  be  worshiped  as  the  Father  and  the  Son,  and 
that  He  is  like  unto  them  in  glory.  —  But  as  the  Council  at  Toledo  did 
not  represent   the   Eastern   Church,   therefore   the  addition   of   filioque 


THE  TRINITY.  81 

to  the  creed  gave  rise  to  the  schism  between  tlie  Eastern  and  the 
Western  Catholic  Church.  Joiiv  Askusxagus  and  Johx  Piiilopoxi's 
were  guilty  of  a  heresy  that  has  been  called  Tritheism.  The  former 
taught  that  Christ  had  but  one  nature  and  he  ascribed  to  each  of  the 
persons  of  the  Trinity  a  distinct  nature,  so  that  there  resulted  three 
essences  and  three  divinities.  The  latter  considered  essence  as  a  basic 
concept,  the  persons  being  three  individuals  under  this  genus.  Damia- 
Nus  was  accused  of  supporting  Tetratheism,  but  the  accusation  cannot 
be  proved.  By  Tetratheism  is  meant  the  subordination  of  the  Father, 
Son  and  Spirit  under  the  divine  essence,  which  becomes  God.  Maximus 
Confessor,  who  prepared  the  way  for  the  introduction  of  the  writings 
of  Dionysius  the  Areopagite  to  the  "Western  Church,  by  which  Neo- 
Platonism  exerted  great  influence,  stated  that  God  is  incomprehensible, 
but  a  personal  spirit,  who  is  the  cause  and  goal  of  the  world.  He  says 
that  Logos  occupies  a  central  position,  and  that  the  Spirit  proceeds 
from  the  Father  and  the  Son.  The  three  persons  exist  in  and  through 
each  other  and  therefore  he  speaks  of  a  perichoresis. 

John  of  Damascus  came  under  the  influence  of  Maximus  and  taught 
as  did  the  latter  that  the  persons  exist  in  and  through  each  other  and 
expressed  this  relationship  by  the  term  Trepi^c!)pr](Ti<;.  He  ascribed  unity 
to  the  Father,  in  whom  dwelt  the  Logos.  The  Spirit  proceeds  from 
the  Father  and  is  mediated  by  the  Son.  He  explained  this  relationship 
by  the  analogy  of  the  sun,  the  rays  and  the  light.  The  rays  and  the 
light  proceed  from  the  sun,  but  the  light  is  mediated  by  the  rays.  The 
controversy  concerning  the  Holy  Spirit  continued  during  the  Scholastic 
period.  Alcuin  defended  the  position  of  Augustine.  Photius  of  Con- 
stantinople accused  the  Roman  Church  of  heresy,  because,  he  asserted, 
it  introduced  two  primitive  causes  in  the  Trinity.  Ratramnus  de- 
fended the  position  of  the  Roman  Church.  At  the  eighth  Ecumenical 
Greek  Council,  held  at  Constantinople  in  879,  every  one  was  condemned 
who  made  any  additions  to  the  Nicseno-Constantinopolitan  Creed.  Some 
of  the  Greeks  made  the  concession  that  the  Spirit  proceeded  from  the 
Father  through  the  Son.  John  Scotus  Erigena  said  that  God  is  the 
absolute  essence  without  determination,  and  taught  therefore  that 
there  was  no  real  Trinity,  but  that  the  distinctions  were  mere  sub- 
jective conceptions.  The  Father  is  essentia,  the  Son  is  the  world  of 
ideas  or  sapientia,  and  the  Holy  Spirit  is  A'ita  or  the  realization  of  the 
ideas.  He  uses  the  analogy  of  the  tire,  rays  and  light.  Anselm  thought 
of  God  as  eternally  realizing  Himself  through  the  process  of  self- 
consciousness  in  accordance  with  thesis,  antithesis  and  synthesis.  God 
is  self-conscious  Spirit  as  subject-object.  The  Father  is  memoria,  the 
Son  intelligentia,  and  the  Holy  Spirit  is  amor.  He  defended  the  view 
that  the  Spirit  proceeds  from  both  the  Father  and  the  Son.  He  also 
sought  to  show  that  there  is  in  the  Trinity  neither  past  nor  future, 
this  by  analogy  with  the  the  simultaneity  of  the  sun,  its  light  and  its 
heat.     RoscELLiNus  said  that  the   persons   of  the   Godhead   were  tres 

Doymaticn.     4. 


82  THEOLOOY. 

res  per  se,  for  otherwise  they  would  be  only  nominal  distinctions. 
They  were  identical  only  in  will  and  power.  He  therefore  supported 
Tritheism.  Auklahu  leaned  somewhat  toward  Sabellianism,  but  taught, 
nevertheless,  that  the  distinctions  belong  not  only  to  the  development 
in  time,  but  that  they  were  found  in  eternity  before  time.  The  Trinity 
consists  of  power,  wisdom  and  goodness.  He  originated  the  gram- 
matical analogy,  representing  the  Father  as  the  first,  the  Son  as  the 
second,  and  the  Holy  Spirit  as  the  third  person  of  the  personal  pro- 
nouns; also  the  analogy  of  the  seal,  the  material  and  the  inscription. 
Rk  iiAKi)  OF  St.  Victor  says  that  power  and  wisdom  are  the  essential 
characteristics  in  the  essence  of  God,  and  that  the  Trinity  is  explained 
through  the  concept  of  love.  Love  also  demands  a  condilectum.  Alex- 
ANUEK  OF  Hales  speaks  of  a  diffusio  per  modum  dilectionis,  which 
expresses  the  procession  of  the  Holy  Spirit.  Thomas  Aquinas  reaches 
the  conception  of  the  Trinity  by  reasoning  from  the  essence  of  man. 
God  thinks  Himself  in  the  Son,  and  in  the  exercise  of  His  will  He 
loves  Himself  in  the  Spirit.  The  Holy  Spirit  proceeds  from  the  Father 
and  the  Son,  because  He  is  loved  by  both.  Joiix  Drxs  Scotis  teaches 
that  there  is  distinction  in  the  essence  of  God,  i.  e.,  through  the 
persons  of  the  Trinity.  But  he  does  not  have  a  clear  conception  of 
the  Trinity.  The  Father  is  conceived  of  as  memoria.  The  generation 
of  the  Son  was  an  act  of  the  free  will,  but  nevertheless  dependent  upon 
thought.  The  Father  generates  the  Son  when  in  memory  He  realizes 
Himself  as  thinking.  The  procession  of  the  Spirit  as  to  its  principle 
is  in  the  will.  He  explains  the  procession  of  the  Spirit  from  the  Father 
and  the  Son  by  comparison  with  the  light  and  the  rays  that  proceed 
from  the  sun  as  one  with  it.  Ray.moxd  of  Sabunok  compares  the  Father 
to  verbum  activum,  the  Son  to  verbum  passivum  and  the  Holy  Spirit 
to  verbum  impersonale.  Master  Eckhart  does  not  set  forth  the  Chris- 
tian doctrine  of  the  Trinity,  but  represents  the  mystical  pantheism. 
God  is  the  eternal  All.  God  is  the  eternal  object  of  His  thought.  The 
thinking  of  God  or  the  self-revealing  of  God  as  the  object  of  His 
thought,  constitutes  the  eternal  generation  of  the  Son.  "God  speaks 
is  equivalent  to  God  begets."  When  God  contemplates  Himself  as  an 
object  in  the  Logos,  His  thought  is  all-inclusive.  But  all  things  would 
return  into  God,  into  unity,  and  this  process  is  likewise  eternal.  In 
this  process  love,  which  is  the  Spirit,  is  the  mediator.  This  procedure 
out  of  God  and  return  into  God  is,  as  it  were,  a  game  which  God  plays 
with  Himself. 

Luther,  who  had  no  taste  for  scholastic  distinctions,  said  that  we 
should  believe  that  there  were  three  persons  in  the  Godhead,  that  the 
persons  were  not  to  be  confused,  that  the  essence  should  not  be  divided. 
From  the  economical  Trinity  revealed  in  the  Word  of  God  he  inferred 
the  truth  or  reality  of  the  ontological  Trinity.  He  makes  use  of  a 
variety  of  figures,  such  as,  word,  image  and  reflection.  Melanciitiion 
explained  the  Trinity  in  the  first  place  on  the  basis  of  the  religious 


THE  TRINITY.  83 

and  practical  needs  of  man,  subsequently  following  Augustine  and 
others  in  reasoning  from  the  nature  and  character  of  the  human  spirit 
to  the  divine.  After  the  Reformation  there  were  three  anti-Trinitarian 
tendencies:  1)  Anabaptists,  such  as  Hetzer,  Denk,  and  others;  2)  theo- 
sophical  natural  philosophers,  headed  by  Servetus;  3)  Socinians,  such 
as  Paustus  Socinus.  Michael  Servetus  accepted  only  an  economical 
Trinity.  God  revealed  Himself  in  a  double  form  of  revelation,  the 
objective  in  the  Word  and  the  subjective  in  the  Spirit.  The  three 
persons  are  diversae  facies  et  species  deitatis.  The  Word  is  the  ideal 
world,  the  archetype  of  the  world,  Logos  endiathetos.  Through  a 
supernatural  generation  this  pre-existent  Christ  became  Logos  pro- 
phorikos.  He  is  not  an  eternal  son,  inasmuch  as  he  was  only  typified 
before.  When  a  word  is  spoken  there  takes  place  an  exhalation.  In 
like  manner  the  Holy  Spirit  proceeded  from  the  word  of  creation,  the 
second  mode  of  revelation.  This  is  the  spirit  of  life  which  reaches 
self-consciousness  in  the  spirit  of  man.  Faustus  Socinus  said  that 
there  is  no  distinction  in  God.  Christ  was  a  mere  man.  He  was 
received  into  heaven  before  He  had  begun  the  work  of  His  office. 
After  the  resurrection  He  received  divine  power  and  might.  The  Holy 
Spirit  was  merely  a  divine  force.  Among  pantheistic  mystics  may  be 
counted  Jacob  Böhme,  who  taught  that  the  Father  was  all,  the  Son 
was  the  heart  of  the  powers  of  the  Father,  and  the  Holy  Spirit  the 
principle  of  motion.  The  Father  is  nature,  the  Son  the  intellect  of 
nature,  and  the  Spirit  the  bond  of  union  between  the  two.  The  Trinity 
has  significance  within  the  sphere  of  natural  life,  but  otherwise  God 
is  all.  The  Arminians  hold  the  doctrine  of  subordination,  for  which 
reason  their  conception  of  the  Trinity  is  faulty. 

Among  the  philosophers  who  have  exercised  either  direct  or  indirect 
influence  on  the  development  of  the  dogma  of  the  Trinity  may  be 
mentioned  Leibnitz,  Kant  and  Hegel.  Leiisnitz  explained  the  Trinity 
through  the  process  of  thought.  The  Father  is  the  thinking  subject, 
the  Son  is  the  object,  and  the  Spirit  is  the  thought  process  itself.  Kant 
sets  forth  the  Trinity  merely  as  a  practical  idea,  and  therefore  teaches 
no  Trinity  at  all.  Prom  the  moral  viewpoint  God  is  considered  as 
the  law-giver,  the  ruler  and  the  judge.  According  to  the  idea  of  the 
law,  God  must  be  love.  The  Father  is  therefore  conceived  of  as  the 
one  who  loves.  The  Son  is  man  made  morally  perfect.  God  is  Holy 
Spirit  because  love  is  dependent  upon  the  agreement  of  man  with  the 
holy  good-will  of  God.  Hegel  said  that  God  is  a  process  which  proceeds 
from  one  stage  of  development  to  another,  but  the  distinctions  are 
lost.  The  Son  of  God  is  the  world,  but  the  world  returns  to  its  source. 
As  the  Spirit  God  returns  from  non  ego  to  Himself.  This  takes  place 
in  the  spirit  of  man,  through  which  God  becomes  conscious  of  Himself. 
The  unity  of  God  and  man  has  been  revealed  in  Christ.  Schleier- 
irACHEK  criticizes  the  church  doctrine,  because  he  considers  that  it 
gives  the  Father  more  power  and  glory  than  the  Son  and  the  Spirit. 


84  THEOLOGT. 

He  says  that  we  have  no  knowledge  of  God  outside  the  world.  Christ 
had  no  pre-existence,  but  was  the  man  in  whom  the  consciousness  of 
God  had  been  clearly  and  perfectly  developed.  Sanctification  does  not 
have  its  source  in  the  Holy  Spirit,  as  the  Church's  doctrine  declares, 
but  in  the  spirit  of  communion  in  the  Christian  Church.  During  the 
18th  and  especially  the  19th  century  Arianism,  Socinianism  and  related 
tendencies  have  sprung  up  in  a  new  form  under  the  name  of  Unita- 
rianism.  Among  the  representatives  may  be  mentioned  James  Priestly, 
James  Freeman,  James  Freeman  Clarke,  W.  E.  Channing  and  James 
Martineau.  These  men  and  the  Unitarians  in  general  are  the  most 
ardent  anti-Trinitarians  in  modern  times.  Within  the  Lutheran  Church 
during  recent  times  more  or  less  confessional  theologians  have  ex- 
pressed themselves  concerning  the  Trinity,  but  there  has  been  no 
special  development  of  the  dogma.  Among  the  least  confessional  theo- 
logians we  may  mention  Kahnis,  and  among  the  confessional  or  near- 
confessional  we  would  mention  only  Thomasius,  Philippi,  Martensen 
and  Granfelt.  Kaiims  says  that  the  Son  and  the  Spirit  are  divine 
personalities,  who  came  into  being  from  the  Father  before  time  and 
mediate  the  relationship  of  God  to  the  world.  The  Father  is  God  in 
the  highest  sense,  but  the  Son  and  the  Spirit  are  only  called  divine 
TiioisrAsius  says  that  the  threefoldness  of  the  atonement  is  experienced 
as  being  combined  in  one  because  it  is  the  expression  of  the  same 
gracious  will.  In  the  economical  Trinity  there  are  both  distinction 
and  union,  and  likewise  in  the  ontological  Trinity.  The  absolute  per- 
sonality subsists  in  three  distinctions  or  persons.  Piui.ippi  explained 
the  Trinity  through  the  atonement.  He  speaks  of  God,  by  whom, 
through  whom  and  in  whom  we  are  reconciled.  Like  others  he  reaches 
the  ontological  Trinity  through  the  economical.  Compare  what  has 
been  previously  quoted  from  Philippi's  Dogmatics.  Mautp:xsex  pro- 
ceeds from  the  concept  of  love.  He  seeks  an  analogy  in  the  being  of 
man,  but  says  that  the  threefoldness  in  man,  thought,  will  and  emo- 
tion, while  not  corresponding,  is  ideal,  inasmuch  as  man  develops  in 
relation  to  the  world.  What  the  world  is  to  man,  that  the  Son  is  to 
the  Father.  The  Spirit  mediates  this  relationship  of  love.  Guankklt 
holds  that  the  Trinity  cannot  be  explained  by  means  of  the  process 
of  self-consciousness.  He  speaks  of  the  threefold  ego,  the  substantial, 
the  objective  and  the  subjective.  Nor  can  the  Trinity  be  explained 
through  the  principle  of  love  alone.  The  two  methods  must  be  com- 
bined. God,  who  is  absolute  love,  is  the  subject  and  object  of  love. 
In  both  there  is  the  same  loving  will,  which,  loved  by  both,  becomes 
a  third  personality.  The  Father  is  the  original  and  eternal  principle, 
the  Son  is  the  original  and  eternal  intellect,  and  the  Holy  Spirit  is 
the  original  and  eternal  will. 


THE    ETERNAL   PURPOSE   OF   GOD.  85 


§7.    THE  ETERNAL  PURPOSE  OF  GOD. 

It  is  customary  to  speak  of  two  eternal  decrees  of  God, 
viz.,  the  decree  to  create  the  world  and  the  decree  to  redeem 
fallen  man.  Although  both  of  these  decrees  are  eternal, 
still  in  our  thought  we  distinguish  between  them  and  place 
the  creational  decree  first.  In  this  decree  God  conceived 
of  the  rational  creatures  as  being  blessed  in  Him,  and,  in 
communion  with  Him  in  the  bonds  of  holy  love  and  with 
each  other,  constituting  a  blessed  organism,  the  Kingdom 
of  God.  For  this  reason  man  was  made  in  the  image  of 
God  through  the  Son  and  unto  Him.  But  sin  prevented  the 
realization  of  the  original  plan.  Wherefore  the  decree  con- 
cerning salvation  became  necessary,  which  in  an  objective 
sense  was  carried  out  through  the  Son  and  unto  Him,  inas- 
much as  He  is  the  eternal  archetype  as  well  as  the  goal  of 
man.  The  determination  to  save  man  was  by  grace  alone 
and  included  all  men,  in  like  manner  as  the  creational 
decree  contemplated  the  salvation  of  all  in  God  through  the 
Son.  We  speak  first  therefore  of  the  universal  benevolence 
of  God. 

1.    The  General  Benevolence  of  God. 

Benevolentia  Dei  universalis  or  pr^destinatio  late 
DICTA,  which  is  conditioned  by  or  refers  to  voluntas  ante- 
cedens,  is  that  act  of  the  gracious  ivill  of  God  ivhich  implies 
that  God  in  etei'nity  has  willed  to  save  all  meyi  through 
Christ  and  through  the  Spirit  to  offer  to  all  men  this  ac- 
quired salvation. 

This  general  decree  of  salvation,  which,  strictly  speaking, 
is  not  election,  contains  three  specifications:  a)  God  did 
not  desire  the  death  of  any  sinner,  but  had  mercy  upon 
the  fallen  human  race;  b)  God  determined  to  send  the  Son 
to  perform  the  work  of  atonement  and  the  Spirit  to  apply 
salvation ;  c)  God  determined  the  order  in  which  men 
should  be  made  partakers  of  salvation. 

The  following  passages  may  be  quoted :  "This  is  good  and 


86  THEOLOGY. 

acceptable  in  the  sight  of  God  our  Saviour ;  who  would  have 
all  men  to  be  saved,  and  come  to  the  knowledge  of  the 
truth"  (1  Tim.  2:  3,  4)  ;  "P'or  God  so  loved  the  world,  that 
he  gave  his  only  begotten  Son,  that  whosoever  believeth  on 
him  should  not  perish,  but  have  eternal  life"  (John  3:  16)  ; 
"But  when  the  Comforter  is  come,  whom  I  will  send  unto 
you  from  the  Father,  even  the  Spirit  of  truth,  which  pro- 
ceedeth  from  the  Father,  he  shall  bear  witness  of  me"  (John 
15:  26)  ;  "Except  one  be  born  of  the  water  and  the  Spirit, 
he  cannot  enter  into  the  kingdom  of  God"  (John  3:5). 

The  following  attributes  are  used  concerning  the  uni- 
versal will  of  God:  1)  gratuita  or  gratuitous:  "By  grace 
have  ye  been  saved"  (Eph.  2:  8);  2)  liberalis  or  free: 
"But  all  things  are  of  God"  (2  Cor.  5:  19)  ;  3)  sequalis  or 
equal:  "God  was  in  Christ  reconciling  the  world  unto  him- 
self" (2  Cor.  5:  19)  ;  4)  seria  or  serious:  "Have  I  any 
pleasure  in  the  death  of  the  wicked,  saith  the  Lord"  (Ezek. 
18:  23)  ;  5)  efficax  or  efficacious:  "But  when  the  fulness  of 
time  came,  God  sent  forth  his  Son,  born  of  a  woman,  born 
under  the  law,  that  he  might  redeem  them  that  were  under 
the  law,  that  we  might  receive  the  adoption  of  sons"  (Gal. 
4:  4,  5)  ;  and  since  God  thought  of  men  as  saved  in  Christ 
and  that  without  Him  there  is  no  salvation,  we  may  add: 
6)  conditionata  or  conditioned:  "Him  who  knew  no  sin  he 
made  to  be  sin  on  our  behalf;  that  we  might  become  the 
righteousness  of  God  in  him"  (2  Cor.  5:  21). 

2.  The  Special  Will  or  Benevolence  of  God. 
Benevolentia  Dei  specialis,  which  refers  to  voluntas 
consequens,  constitutes  pr.-edestinatio  stricte  dicta  or 
ELECTI0  (election).  On  account  of  the  relation  of  men  to 
the  condition,  the  opposite  of  electio  must  also  be  treated, 
viz.,  reprobatio  or  reprobation.  We  desire  at  this  juncture 
to  remark  that  praedestinatio  is  not  a  genus  with  electio  and 
reprobatio  as  subordinated  species.  Praedestinatio  and 
electio,  therefore,  art  not  logical  synonyms,  but  they  are 
grammatical  synonyms.  They  are  to  be  distinguished 
formally,  not  materially.    Praedestinatio,  as  can  be  seen  by 


THE  ETERNAL  PL'RPOSE  OF   GOD.  '87 

the  prefix  prse,  has  reference  to  priority,  the  order  and  the 
means.  Electio,  as  seen  by  the  prefix  e,  has  reference  to 
the  objects  for  election,  those  taken  out  of  the  mass  for 
election.  In  Ephesians  1 :  4,  5,  the  corresponding  verbal 
forms  aie  used,  from  which  it  is  clear  that  there  is  no 
material  distinction. 

Electio,  or  predestination,  is  the  eternal  and  conditioyied 
decree  of  God.  to  save  all  loho  believe  in  Christ  and  luho 
persevere  in  this  faith  to  the  end  of  their  earthly  life. 

Causa  impulsiva  interna  is  equivalent  to  the  free  grace 
of  God  alone.  Causa  impulsiva  externa  is  equivalent  to 
the  merit  of  Christ,  considered  in  relation  to  the  foreknown 
final  application.  The  Calvinists,  on  the  other  hand,  say 
that  the  expression  is  equivalent  to  God's  unconditioned 
will.  They  also  say  that  according  to  voluntas  signi  God 
wills  to  save  all  men,  but  not  according  to  voluntas  bene- 
placiti.  But  we  say  that  the  revealed"  and  the  secret  will 
of  God  agree.  Electio  comprises  the  following  three  terms : 
a)  Trpdöeo-ts,  or  the  decree  of  God  to  save  those  that  believe 
in  Christ;  b)  Trpoyvwo-t?,  or  God's  foreknowledge  of  those 
that  would  believe  in  Christ;  c)  7rpoopio-/xo9 ,  or  God's  prede- 
termination or  foreordination  to  save  those  whom  He  fore- 
saw would  believe. 

The  following  attributes  are  ascribed  to  electio :  non  abso- 
luta, because  election  depends  upon  the  attitude  of  man, 
sed  ordinata  et  conditionata,  since  God  has  determined  a 
certain  order  of  salvation  and  necessary  conditions.  Al- 
though the  foreknowledge  of  God  does  not  imply  any  com- 
pulsion, yet  by  virtue  of  His  omniscience  God  cannot  make 
any  mistake  in  His  foreknowledge,  wherefore  dogmaticians 
generally  say  from  this  point  of  view  that  electio  is  also 
categorica,  or  determined  and  clear,  immutable  and  irre- 
vocable. In  this  sense  electio  is  non  conditionata,  but  this 
is  something  entirely  different  from  the  Calvinistic  doctrine 
of  predestination. 

HOLLAZius  presents  therefore  the  following  syllogism 
concerning  predestination :  "Every  one  who  will  persever- 
ingly  believe  in  Christ  to  the  end  of  life,  will  certainly  be 


88  •  THEOLOGY. 

saved,  and,  therefore,  shall  be  elected  and  be  written  in  the 
Book  of  Life.  But  Abraham,  Peter,  Paul,  etc.,  will  perse- 
veringly  believe  in  Christ  to  the  end  of  life.  Therefore, 
Abraham,  Peter,  Paul,  etc.,  will  certainly  be  saved,  and, 
therefore,  shall  be  elected  and  written  in  the  Book  of  Life." 
This  syllogism  contains  the  three  terms  or  the  major  and 
minor  premises  as  well  as  predestination  itself.  God  does 
not  predetermine  that  any  one  shall  believe,  but  He  foresees 
those  who  will  be  moved  by  the  grace  of  God,  and  who  will 
believe,  whom  He  also  elects  to  eternal  salvation.  This  does 
not  imply  any  contradiction  between  the  General  and  Spe- 
cial Will  of  God,  for,  although  God  would  that  all  men 
should  be  saved,  still  He  cannot  force  anyone  in  a  prede- 
terministic  way  to  believe,  and  without  faith  no  one  can  be 
elected  and  saved.  The  foreknowledge  of  God  does  not 
imply  any  determinism,  so  that  this  foreknowledge  should 
be  the  cause  of  faith,  but  God  foresees  that  this  or  that 
person  will  believe.  Although  God  works  faith  in  a  manner 
to  exclude  all  Pelagianism,  Semi-Pelagianism  and  Syner- 
gism, still  this  divine  work  of  grace  does  not  imply  that  God 
predetermines  in  whom  He  will  work  faith,  for  although 
He  would  that  all  men  should  be  saved,  yet  man  is  able  to 
hinder  the  gracious  work  of  God's  Spirit.  The  responsi- 
bility of  man  must  not  be  overlooked.  God  knows  in  ad- 
vance whether  or  not  the  sinner  will  oppose  the  work  of  the 
Spirit,  whether  he  will  be  moved  by  the  Spirit  to  believe, 
and  whether  he  will  endure  unto  the  end.  If  this  were  not 
the  case,  then  predestination  would  be  unconditional.  Hu- 
man reason  balks  at  this  because  it  cannot  comprehend  how 
God  can  seriously  call  those  concerning  whom  He  foreknows 
that  they  will  not  believe.  But  it  is  clear  that  the  call  of 
God  must  be  the  same  to  all,  since  His  predetermination 
depends  upon  His  foreknowledge  of  the  attitude  of  man  to 
the  proffered  grace  of  God.  The  individual  man  could  not 
enter  into  any  relationship  with  God  in  this  sense,  if  Christ 
had  not  died  for  him,  and  if  the  work  of  the  Holy  Spirit 
were  not  performed  in  his  heart.  Neither  can  we  believe 
in  God  and  limit  His  omniscience,  for  then  He  would  cease 


THE   ETERNAL   PX^RPOSE   OF   GOD.  89 

to  be  the  absolute  personality.  His  omniscience  does  not 
encroach  upon  His  love,  His  righteousness,  and  His  faith- 
fulness. As  God  is  omniscient  He  necessarily  foreknows. 
He  must,  therefore,  foreknow  persons  who  will  have  faith 
in  Christ.  If  it  is  claimed  that  faith  is  antecedent  to  elec- 
tion, we  must  consider  that  from  the  divine  viewpoint  there 
is  no  antecedence,  because  God  is  eternal  and  omniscient. 
He  does  not  reason  in  regard  to  election  as  we  do.  When 
He  foresees  who  will  believe.  He  does  not  think  of  faith  as 
a  cause  of  election.  No  one  is  saved  on  account  of  faith,  but 
faith  is  necessary  to  salvation.  If  God  in  His  omniscience 
has  made  such  a  condition.  His  knowledge  in  regard  to  be- 
lievers does  not  mean  that  their  faith  is  a  merit  or  cause 
of  election.  The  believers  themselves  know  by  their  experi- 
ence that  the  Holy  Spirit  effects  faith.  The  phrase  "elec- 
tion in  view  of  faith"  does  not  necessarily  imply  Synergism 
and  cannot  mean  that,  as  no  one  can  believe  by  his  own 
powers.  The  cause  of  salvation  is  sola  gratia,  but  only  be- 
lievers will  be  saved.  If  God  wills  that  all  should  be  saved 
by  grace,  through  faith,  would  not  God  save  every  one,  if 
it  were  possible?  As  the  Holy  Spirit  works  faith,  why  do 
not  all  men  believe?  Should  we  say  that  the  reason  is  a 
mystery?  We  know  that  men  resist  the  Holy  Spirit,  but 
why  do  some  give  up  resistance?  Is  the  grace  of  God  irre- 
sistible? But  such  a  belief  would  be  Calvinism.  Should  we 
again  exclaim :  It  is  a  mystery !  The  Scriptures  demand 
faith  or  repentance  and  faith;  where  shall  we  place  the 
responsibiliy?  The  Holy  Spirit  works  on  the  hearts  of  men 
by  calling,  illumining,  convincing,  convicting,  etc.  Accord- 
ing to  the  Bible,  He  calls  all  seriously.  If  the  Holy  Spirit 
awakens  sinners  and  illumines  them  by  the  Law  to  experi- 
ence contrition  and  by  the  Gospel  to  become  believers,  the 
failure  of  conversion  with  its  attendant  responsibility  must 
be  due  to  the  resistance  of  the  sinner.  But  if  the  awakened 
sinner  ceases  to  resist  and  becomes  passive  through  "the 
illumination  of  the  Spirit,  this  passivity  cannot  be  called 
Synergism,  Pelagianism,  etc.  The  psychological  moment 
and  reason  when  and  why  some  become  passive  and  do  not 


90  THEOLOGY. 

resist  may  look  mysterious,  but  the  fact  that  a  person  be- 
comes passive  and  does  not  hinder  the  Spirit  from  con- 
tinuing the  good  work  to  effect  conversion  cannot  be  called 
Synergism.  Man  cannot  convert  himself.  But  if  a  sick 
person  becomes  convinced  that  a  certain  physician  can  cure 
him  and  then  yields  to  his  treatment,  this  yielding  or  pas- 
sivity is  not  a  self-cure.  Transferring  the  case  to  the  spir- 
itual domain  of  conversion,  such  an  instance  would  not  be 
Pelagianism,  Semi-Pelagianism  and  Synergism.  When  re- 
sistance ceases,  the  Spirit  effects  conversion.  If  God  elects 
in  view  of  such  work  of  the  Spirit  as  leads  the  sinner  to 
faith  and  preserves  him  in  Christ  unto  death,  such  an  elec- 
tion is  not  a  causal  antecedent  of  election  to  be  styled 
Synergism.  No  one  is  elected  on  account  of  faith,  but  God 
elects  believers  who  have  faith  at  death,  and  the  cause  is 
sola  gratia  and  the  merit  of  Christ  applied  by  the  Holy 
Spirit  through  faith.  As  God  is  omniscient  and  not  limited 
by  the  past,  present  or  future.  He  knows  His  own  elect  also 
by  foreknowledge,  which  expression  is  used  in  relation  to 
us,  since  omniscience  covers  all  relations  of  God. 

As  the  Bible  is  the  Word  of  God  and  a  revelation  to  us 
who  live  in  time,  the  Holy  Spirit  uses  the  words  suitable 
to  our  condition.  In  Rom.  8:  29,  30  we  find  the  order  of 
God  as  to  election  expressed  in  a  way  which  will  permit 
the  use  of  the  word  foreknowledge  in  regard  to  the  justified, 
and  we  are  justified  by  faith.  We  read:  "For  whom  he 
foreknew,  he  also  foreordained."  The  Greek  word  for  fore- 
knoic  cannot  in  English  be  rendered  by  foreordain.  God 
foreknew  certain  persons  from  eternity,  whom  He  also 
foreordained  or  predestined  to  be  saved,  and  He  began  to 
realize  this  decree  in  time  by  calling,  justifying  and  glori- 
fying. These  persons  were  not  foreknown,  because  they 
were  predestinated,  but  their  predestination  to  salvation  or 
election  was  dependent  upon  foreknowledge,  since  God  is 
omniscient.  Who  are  the  persons  whom  God  elects?  Christ 
died  for  all,  but  only  believers  are  elected  to  salvation.  It 
is  not  an  unconditional  predestination  to  faith.  No  one  is 
excluded  from  salvation  by  an  absolute  decree;  every  one 


THK  KTEUNAL  PURPOSE  OF   GOD.  91 

is  privileged  to  become  a  believer.  If  we  are  justified  by 
faith,  we  are  also  elected  by  being  in  Christ  at  the  end  of 
life.  God  knows  beforehand  from  eternity  who  are  His 
elect.  Gerhard  says  :  "Justification,  which  occurred  in  time, 
is  a  mirror  of  the  election  which  occurred  before  time." 
The  expression  "elected  in  view  of  faith"  has  been  difl'er- 
ently  explained.  Bene  docet  qui  bene  distinguit.  The  larger 
part  of  the  Lutheran  Church  uses  this  expression  while 
denying  that  it  implies  Pelagianism.  If  a  phrase  is  not 
recognized  by  all,  but  the  definition  is  correct  as  to  the 
meaning,  there  should  be  no  dispute.  If  the  rejection  of 
the  words  "in  view  of  faith"  would  be  looked  upon  by  a 
large  part  of  the  Church  as  .a  Calvinistic  tendency  and  the 
retaining  of  the  words  would  appear  to  the  rest  as  Syner- 
gism, we  should  keep  in  mind  that  God  elected  the  believers 
who  are  in  Christ  at  the  close  of  their  life,  and  He  elected 
them  from  eternity,  as  He  is  omniscient.  If  the  expression 
"elected  to  faith"  may  be  defended  according  to  Praedesti- 
natio  late  dicta,  the  wording  "elected  through  faith"  may 
be  just  as  correct  according  to  Prsedestinatio  stricte  dicta  or 
Electio.  We  have  already  discussed  faith  as  the  work  of  the 
Spirit.  But  the  Spirit  does  not  compel  men  to  believe.  Man 
is  responsible,  if  he  does  reject  the  proff'ered  grace. 

If  the  elect  are  those  who  die  as  believers,  it  may  be  that 
not  all  believers  at  present  are  elect,  because  they  may  fall 
from  grace  and  die  in  unbelief.  On  the  other  hand  there 
may  be  unbelievers  at  present  who  are  elect  and,  therefore, 
will  be  regenerated.  Though  they  fall,  they  will  be  restored 
to  faith  and  will  die  as  believers.  God  is  infallible  in  His 
foreknowledge  or  omniscience.  Faithfulness  unto  death  is 
not  the  consequence  of  predestination  or  election,  but  the 
condition  of  election.  An  elect  person  remains  in  Christ, 
not  by  his  own  power,  but  by  the  grace  of  God.  The  only 
cause  of  election  to  salvation  is  the  sole  grace  (sola  gratia) 
of  God  as  effective  in  the  merit  of  Christ,  but  the  condition 
of  election  is  faith  in  Christ.  Whatever  the  mystery  in  the 
election,  it  is  revealed  that  "God  so  loved  the  world,  that 
he  gave  his  only  begotten  Son,  that  whosoever  believeth  on 


92  THEOLOGY. 

him  should  not  perish,  but  have  eternal  life."  The  new 
birth  or  regeneration  is  a  necessary  condition  for  entering 
heaven.  Christ  said  to  Nicodemus:  "Except  one  be  born  of 
water  and  the  Spirit,  he  cannot  enter  into  the  kingdom  of 
God."  The  Lutheran  Church  believes  that  children  at  their 
Baptism  are  regenerated  and,  therefore,  have  faith.  If 
children  die  without  falling  from  baptismal  grace,  there  is 
no  Christian  who  doubts  their  salvation.  Only  a  Calvinist 
might  ascribe  absolute  or  unconditional  rejection  to  such 
children  in  case  they  were  not  unconditionally  elected  or 
predestinated.  Why  do  not  all  grown  persons  become  re- 
generated at  Baptism  ?  The  answer  is,  because  of  resistance 
in  unbelief.  When  they  come. to  believe.  Baptismal  grace 
is  fully  applied  and  effective.  Why  does  Baptismal  grace 
apply  immediately  to  a  child?  The  answer  is,  that  such  a 
child  does  not  self-consciously  resist  the  Spirit  at  Baptism. 
As  omniscient,  God  must  have  foreknown  the  circumstances 
and  have  from  eternity  elected  those  children  who  die  with- 
out having  fallen  from  grace.  In  the  Christian  Church, 
except  for  some  sects,  all  children  are  baptized,  but 
many  fall  from  Baptismal  grace.  As  the  Spirit  calls  them 
to  return  to  God  by  prevenient  grace  and  by  so-called  pre- 
paratory grace  and  continues  to  work  through  illumination, 
when  does  the  Spirit  work  faith?  The  answer  is,  when 
resistance  ceases.  The  Spirit  of  God  works  upon  the  spirit 
of  man,  illumines  his  mind  and  appeals  to  his  feelings.  In 
the  impelling,  not  compelling,  .work  of  the  Holy  Spirit  man 
may  yield  and  faith  be  effected.  If  such  a  person  remains 
in  Christ  or  dies  in  faith,  he  is  elected  from  eternity.  But 
we  must  not  ignore  the  work  of  the  Spirit  in  Baptism  and 
on  account  of  Baptism.  The  decree  of  election  has  no 
proviso  in  itself.  God  is  omniscient  and  knows  His  own 
from  eternity.  From  the  viewpoint  of  God  their  names  are 
irrevocably  written  in  the  Book  of  Life.  Our  own  certainty 
is  not  absolute,  but  relative,  but  we  are  ordinarily  certain 
of  our  justification  and  regeneration,  and  we  know  that  God 
will  spare  no  effort  to  preserve  us.  The  Lord  says:  "No 
one  shall  snatch  them  out  of  my  hand."    We  should  use  the 


THE  ETERN.VL  PTJRPOSE   OF   GOD.  93 

means  of  grace,  live  accordingly  and  trust  the  Lord,  Com- 
pare also  the  following  passages :  Rom.  8 :  38,  39 ;  1  Cor, 
9:  27;  2  Tim.  4:  7,  8;  Rev,  3:  5. 

The  following  Scripture  passages  may  especially  be  noted : 
"Even  as  he  chose  us  in  him  (Christ)  before  the  foundation 
of  the  world,  that  we  should  be  holy  and  without  blemish 
before  him  in  love :  having  foreordained  us  unto  adoption 
as  sons  through  Jesus  Christ  unto  himself,  according  to  the 
good  pleasure  of  his  will"  (Eph.  1:  4,  5).  There  are  some 
who  would  refer  this  passage  to  the  general  or  universal 
will  of  God,  maintaining  that  the  general  decree  of  salva- 
tion in  Christ  is  here  expressed.  But  since  the  letter  is 
written  to  the  saints  and  the  faithful,  it  is  clear  that  the 
special  will  of  God  is  referred  to.  However,  the  special  will 
of  God  is  connected  with  and  grounded  in  the  general  will. 
This  is  important  for  the  reason  that  some  say  that  all  are 
elected.  To  be  sure,  everything  depends  upon  a  good  inter- 
pretation, and  if  we  add — in  Christ,  then  it  would  be  cor- 
rect. Nevertheless,  it  is  better  to  express  oneself  in  such 
manner  that  no  misunderstanding  may  arise.  The  faithful 
are  the  elect,  as  expressed  in  the  special  decree  or  will  of 
of  God.  It  is  one  thing  that  God  would  that  all  men  should 
be  saved,  and  another,  to  be  elected,  since  in  the  latter  case 
the  relationship  of  man  to  the  proffered  salvation  is  taken 
into  consideration.  The  cited  passage  also  shows  that  elec- 
tion is  eternal.  Cf ,  2  Tim.  1:9:  "Before  times  eternal." 
The  particularity  of  election  is  expressed  in  Matt.  22:  14: 
"Many  are  called,  but  few  chosen."  Its  immutability  is 
expressed  in  2  Tim.  2:  19:  "Howbeit  the  firm  foundation 
of  God  standeth,  having  this  seal.  The  Lord  knoweth  them 
that  are  his,"  and  also  in  1  Peter  1:5:  "Who  by  the  power 
of  God  are  guarded."  Cf.  Rom.  8:  29,  30.  Its  certainty  is 
expressed  in  the  following  passages:  "Rejoice  that  your 
names  are  written  in  heaven"  (Luke  10:  20)  ;  "For  I  am 
persuaded,  that  neither  death,  nor  life,  nor  angels,  nor  prin- 
cipalities, nor  things  present,  nor  things  to  come,  nor  pow- 
ers, nor  height,  nor  depth,  nor  any  other  creature,  shell 
be  able  to  separate  us  from  the  love  of  God,  which  is  in 


94  TIIEOI.OOY. 

Christ  Jesus  our  Lord"  (Rom.  8:  38,  39).  That  the  elect 
can  fall  and  have  fallen  is  referred  to  in  such  passages  as 
the  following:  "Restore  unto  me  the  joy  of  thy  salvation, 
and  uphold  me  with  a  willing  spirit"  (Ps.  51:  12)  ;  "When 
once  thou  hast  turned  again,  establish  thy  brethren"  (Luke 
22:  32)  ;  "Wherefore  let  him  that  thinketh  he  standeth  take 
heed  lest  he  fall"  (1  Cor.  10:  12).  W^hen  the  elect  fall,  God 
foreknows  their  return  to  faith  and  that  they  will  die  in 
faith.  Otherwise  they  would  not  be  elect.  Concerning  per- 
severance in  faith  unto  the  end  the  following  passages  may 
be  quoted :  "He  that  endureth  to  the  end,  the  same  shall  be 
saved"  (Matt.  10:  22).  "Be  thou  faithful  unto  death,  and 
I  will  give  thee  the  crown  of  life"  (Rev.  2:  10).  One  of 
the  most  important  passages  that  throw  light  upon  the 
doctrine  of  election  is  Rom.  8:  29,  30:  "For  whom  he  fore- 
knew, he  also  ordained  to  be  conformed  to  the  image  of  his 
Son,  that  he  might  be  the  firstborn  among  many  brethren: 
and  whom  he  foreordained,  them  he  also  called:  and  whom 
he  called,  them  he  also  justified:  and  whom  he  justified, 
them  he  also  glorified."  Cf.  Acts  13:  48.  The  verb  for 
ordain  is  rao-o-w  and  not  as  in  Rom.  8 :  30.  The  expression 
does  not  support  the  Calvinistic  view.  Finally  we  must 
direct  attention  to  the  9th  chapter  of  Romans,  which,  the 
Calvinists  claim,  militates  against  the  Lutheran  position. 
Verses  11,  12,  13,  18,  22  and  23  treat  specifically  of  the 
question:  "That  the  purpose  of  God  according  to  election 
might  stand — Jacob  I  loved,  Esau  I  hated. — So  then  he  hath 
mercy  upon  whom  he  will,  and  whom  he  will  be  hardeneth." 
— Vessels  of  wrath  fitted  unto  destruction — vessels  of  mercy, 
which  he  afore  prepared  unto  glory."  HOLLAZius  says  that 
these  passages  speak  of  God's  voluntas  consequens.  The 
hardening  is  judicial.  Quenstedt  says  that  the  text  speaks 
of  Jacob  and  Esau  from  the  temporal  point  of  view,  and  not 
concerning  their  election  in  a  spiritual  sense.  If  the  Cal- 
vinists were  right  in  their  interpretation,  then  this  passage 
would  mean  that  the  descendants  of  Jacob  would  be  saved 
and  the  descendants  of  Esau  damned.  We  must  likewise 
bear  in  mind  the  object  of  Paul's  arguments  in  the  9th 


THE   ETE(?NAL   PURPOSE   OF   GOD.  95 

chapter,  inasmuch  as  he  does  not  treat  directly  of  the  doc- 
trine of  election,  but  speaks  of  the  position  of  the  Jews  and 
the  heathens.  Besides  we  should  not  forget  the  analogy 
of  faith.  In  the  preceding  chapter  Paul  clearly  expounds 
the  doctrine  of  election.  The  clear  passages  explain  the 
doubtful. 

3.    Concerning  Reprobation. 

Reprobatio,  or  reprobation,  is  the  eternal  and  conditional 
decree  of  God  by  which  He  leaves  to  eternal  condemnation 
those  that  are  unfaithfid  to  the  end  of  life  and  who  there- 
fore  die  in  unbelief. 

Causa  impulsiva  interna  is  equivalent  to  the  punitive 
righteousness  of  God,  justitia  punitiva.  Causa  impulsiva 
EXTERNA  is  equivalent  to  the  rejection  of  the  merit  of  Christ 
by  the  unbelievers,  i.  e.,  the  foreseen  incredulitas  finalis. 

The  terms  that  are  used  in  describing  reprobatio  are  the 
following:  a)  Trpoöeo-ts,  or  the  decree  of  God  that  all  men  who 
continue  in  unbelief  shall  be  condemned  for  their  sins;  b) 
Trpdyvwo-ts,  or  God's  foreseeing  who  they  are;  c)  dTroSo^i/xao-ca, 
or  the  application  of  the  decree  that  those  whom  God  has 
thus  foreseen  shall,  by  reason  of  their  rejection  of  the  grace 
of  God,  be  left  to  eternal  condemnation. 

Reprobation  does  not  imply  determinism,  but  is  condi- 
tionata,  i.  e.,  dependent  upon  the  attitude  of  man  in  reject- 
ing the  proffered  grace  of  salvation,  and  immutabilis,  be- 
cause God  correctly  foresees  who  will  die  in  unbelief  and 
bases  His  decree  to  leave  them  to  eternal  condemnation 
upon  that  foreknowledge.  The  knowledge  and  the  will  of 
God  do  not  correspond.  The  free  acts  of  man  do  not  take 
place  because  God  foresees  them,  rather  God  foresees  that 
they  will  take  place.  God  is  therefore  not  the  cause  of  the 
rejection  of  any  man,  and  is  not  active  in  the  same  manner 
in  reprobation  as  in  election. 

The  following  passages  may  be  quoted :  "But  after  thy 
hardness  and  impenitent  heart  treasurest  up  for  thyself 
wrath  in  the  day  of  wrath  and  revelation  of  the  righteous 
judgment  of  God"   (Rom.  2:5);  "He  that  obeyeth  not  the 


96  thp:oi,o(;y. 

Son  shall  not  see  life,  but  the  wrath  of  God  abideth  on  him" 
(John  3 :  36)  ;  "Depart  from  me,  ye  cursed,  into  the  eternal 
fire  which  is  prepared  for  the  devil  and  his  angels"  (Matt. 
25:  41)  ;  "A  stone  of  stumbling,  and  a  rock  of  offence;  for 
they  stumble  at  thy  word,  being  disobedient:  whereunto 
also  they  were  appointed"  (1  Peter  2:8).  This  latter  im- 
plies no  other  predetermination  than  that  contained  in  the 
definition.  God  has  foreseen  their  unbelief  and  He  has 
determined  that  all  unbelievers  shall  be  rejected. 

4.    Notes  on  the  History  of  Dogma. 

During  the  first  or  Apologetical  period  it  was  generally 
taught  that  Christ  had  suff'ered  and  died  for  all,  that  the 
call  is  general,  and  that  God  has  predetermined  men  only 
on  the  ground  of  His  foreknowledge  of  their  belief  or  un- 
belief. In  the  following  period  the  struggle  between  Augus- 
tine and  Pelagianism,  etc.,  took  place,  when  it  may  be  said 
that  the  foundation  of  the  doctrine  of  predestination  was 
laid,  which  was  developed  with  all  its  implications  by  Gott- 
schalk  during  the  Scholastic  period  and  by  Calvin  during 
the  period  of  the  Reformation.  Within  the  Catholic  Church 
the  controversy  concerning  predestination  again  waxed 
warm  at  the  close  of  the  sixteenth  century,  and  through  the 
Jansenistic  struggle  during  the  first  half  of  the  seventeenth 
century.  In  the  Lutheran  Church  at  the  same  time  a  strug- 
gle arose  on  account  of  Huber,  who  had  come  over  to  the 
Lutheran  Church.  Concerning  election  he  taught  a  limit- 
less universalism.  Aegidius  Hunnius  combated  Huber's 
heretical  view.  Within  the  Reformed  Church  there  arose 
at  the  same  time  a  tendency  that  has  been  called  Amyrald- 
ism,  and  still  another  called  Pajonism.  In  modern  times 
Schleiermacher  sought  to  nullify  the  dualism  of  the  doctrine 
of  predestination  and  was  thereby  led  to  a  solution  of  the 
problem  that  would  imply  the  final  salvation  of  all  men. 
Within  the  Lutheran  Church  during  recent  times  there  has 
been  no  important  controversy  concerning  predestination 
with  the  exception  of  a  bitter  struggle  within  a  part  of  the 


THE   ETERNAL   PUKPOSE   OF   GOD.  97 

Lutheran  Church  in  North  America.  The  controversy  arose 
on  account  of  the  expression  intuitu  fidei,  whose  content  in 
the  doctrine  of  predestination  the  Missouri  Synod  did  not 
approve.  This  synod  sets  forth  a  view  that  partly  may 
imply  Calvinism  and  Amyraldism  in  the  actual  result.  But 
the  Missourians  protest  that  they  do  not  teach  Calvinism  in 
any  sense,  because  they  accept  the  General  Benevolence  of 
God  and  reject  double  predestination.  We  herewith  append 
some  special  notes.  x 

OuiGEN  was  the  first  to  present  clearly  the  relationship  between  the 
foreknowledge  of  God  and  the  acts  of  man.  The  acts  of  man  do  not 
take  place  by  virtue  of  God's  foreknowledge,  but  God  foresees  how 
men  will  act. 

During  the  Polemical  period  Basil  the  Great,  Cyril  of  Jerusalem  and 
Gregory  of  Nyssa  took  similar  positions  on  the  doctrine.  Chrysostom 
says  that  predestination  to  salvation  depends  both  upon  the  love  of 
God  and  the  virtue  of  man.  According  to  the  first  will  of  God  He 
would  that  all  men  should  be  saved,  and  in  accordance  with  His  second 
will  He  would  that  those  who  obey  His  will  should  be  saved,  and  that 
the  others  should  perish.  Jerome  taught  that  grace  was  offered  to  all, 
but  that  predestination  wa,s  dependent  upon  God's  foreknowledge  and 
that  therefore  election  was  conditional.  In  the  beginning  Augx'stine 
taught  that  grace  was  conditioned  by  the  free  will  of  man,  and  that 
predestination  was  dependent  upon  God's  foreknowledge  of  man's  faith. 
But  when  he  later  began  to  emphasize  man's  inability,  maintaining 
that  only  that  grace  could  save  which  was  not  conditioned  by  the 
relation  of  man,  he  was  led  on  to  the  doctrine  of  gratia  irresistibilis. 
From  this  point  he  reached  the  position  that  God  through  a  decretum 
absolutum  had  chosen  out  of  the  fallen  mass  of  humanity  a  certain 
number  of  vessels  of  mercy  upon  whom  He  conferred  faith  and  donum 
perseverantise.  The  other  He  left  to  everlasting  condemnation.  Nor 
was  any  injustice  done,  because  they  had  deserved  the  perdition  of 
hell.  He  said  that  the  fall  into  sin  depended  upon  the  freedom  of 
Adam.  Augustine  held  the  Infralapsarian  view.  The  Infralapsarians 
taught  that  God  had  made  His  unconditional  decree  to  save  some  and 
leave  the  others  to  condemnation,  because  of  the  fact  that  through  the 
fall  into  sin  man  had  made  himself  guilty  of  condemnation.  The 
Supralapsarians  taught  that  God  had  made  His  unconditional  decree 
prior  to  and  independent  of  the  fall  into  sin,  which  He  nevertheless 
foreknew,  so  that  the  fall  itself  was  a  result  of  this  decree.  The 
Pelagimis  rejected  the  unconditional  theory  of  predestination.  Their 
position  was  dependent  upon  their  conception  of  human  freedom.  The 
Semi-Pelagians,  such  as  Cassianus,  Faustus  and  others,  taught  the 
universality   of   grace   and   rejected   the   unconditional   theory   of  pre- 


98  TiiKOi.or.Y. 

destination.  Naturally  tliia  depended  upon  their  doctrine  of  man's 
assistance  in  his  conversion.  The  Semi-Pelagians  were  victorious  at 
Aries  in  472  and  at  Lyons  in  475.  Pko.spku  AQriTANus.  who  defended 
Augustine,  taught  that  God's  foreknowledge  and  predetermination  co- 
incide merely  with  regard  to  the  elect.  He  spoke  of  a  concealed  will 
of  God,  according  to  which  only  the  elect  were  considered,  and  of  a 
revealed  will,  in  accordance  with  which  God  would  that  all  men  should 
be  saved.  During  the  second  half  of  the  fifth  century  a  book  appeared 
that  bore  the  title,  De  vocatione  gentium,  which  is  supposed  to  have 
been  written  by  Leo  the  Great.  This  book  rejects  Semi-Pelagianism  and 
unconditional  predestination,  but  speaks  of  universal  grace  and  also  of 
special  grace  with  reference  to  the  elect.  Fulgentius  of  Ruspk  and 
C.KSAitius  oi<  Aklks  did  much  to  accomplish  the  defeat  of  Semi- 
Pelagianism  at  Orange  in  529.  The  question  of  predestination  was  not 
touched,  but  the  theory  that  God  had  predestined  certain  persons  to 
sin  was  rejected.  Gukgoky  tiik  Great  supported  a  moderate  Augus- 
tinian view.  He  based  his  theory  of  predestination  on  the  foreknowl- 
edge of  God  and  rejected  the  doctrine  of  decretum  absolutum.  Al- 
though he  taught  that  grace  could  be  lost,  still  he  seems  to  have  sup- 
ported the  theory  of  gratia  irresistibilis. 

John  of  Damascus  followed  Chrysostom,  but  said:  "It  behooves  us 
to  know  that  God  knows  all  things  beforehand,  but  that  He  does  not 
determine  all  things.  With  relation  to  us  He  foresees  all,  but  does  not 
determine  it."  Alcuin  supported  the  views  of  Augustine,  but  rejected 
predestination  to  perdition.  Gottschalk  was  the  first  to  present 
clearly  the  doctrine  of  a  double  predestination.  He  did  not  teach  that 
God  had  predetermined  sin,  but  that  He  had  predetermined  the  repro- 
bate to  eternal  perdition.  Therefore  he  also  taught  that  God  did  not 
desire  that  all  should  be  saved,  and  that  Christ  had  not  died  for  all. 
His  doctrine  was  condemned  at  the  Synod  of  Quiercy  in  849,  chiefly 
through  the  efforts  of  Rabanus  and  Hincmar.  Rahams  Maiius  re- 
jected the  doctrine  of  double  predestination.  He  said  that  predestina- 
tion was  unconditional  in  relation  to  the  elect,  but  in  relation  to  the 
damned  it  was  conditioned  on  their  attitude,  which  God  had  foreseen. 
Like  Prosper  Aquitanus  he  distinguished  between  voluntas  beneplaciti 
and  voluntas  signi.  Hincmar,  Florus  and  John  Scotus  Erigena  fought 
against  the  doctrine  of  Gottschalk,  but  Prudentius  and  Ratramnus  sup- 
ported the  doctrine  of  double  predestination.  Ansklm  considered  that 
that  which  was  necessary  from  the  viewpoint  of  eternity  may  appear 
in  its  temporal  development  to  be  dependent  upon  the  will,  and  that 
the  foreknowledge  and  predetermination  of  God  are  united  in  relation 
to  the  good.  Pktkr  tiik  Lo.mhaud  set  forth  that  predestination  and 
foreknowledge  were  united  only  in  relation  to  the  good.  He  said  that 
God  rejected  those  He  knew  would  sin  and  thereby  deserve  eternal 
death.  Like  Anselm,  Lombard  tried  to  follow  Augustine  without  ac- 
cepting Augustinianism  in  all  its  severity.    Tho.mas  AgriXAs  considered 


THE   KTERNAL  J'lRPOSK    OF   GOP.  99 

that  both  electio  and  reprobatio  belonged  to  God's  predetermination, 
but  that  God  did  not  predetermine  the  evil,  only  the  punishment  of 
evil.  Antecedenter  God  would  that  all  should  be  saved,  but  not  conse- 
quenter.  The  will  of  God  was  therefore  twofold.  He  predetermined 
to  salvation  certain  ones  upon  whom  He  would  show  His  mercy,  and 
others  upon  whom  His  goodness  would  reveal  itself  in  the  form  of 
punitive  righteousness.  Duns  Scotus  held  the  Semi-Pelagian  view. 
Thomas  Bkadwardink  was  an  Augustinian,  yea,  a  new  Gottschalk.  He 
complained  that  nearly  the  whole  world  had  fallen  Into  the  Pelagian 
error.  Wickliffe  and  Huss  approached  closely  the  view  of  Augustine. 
Luther  at  first  supported  the  stern  doctrine  of  predestination,  as 
may  be  seen  in  his  book  De  servo  arbitrio  against  Erasmus.  He  held 
that  he  could  not  be  certain  of  his  salvation,  if  it  were  dependent  upon 
human  freedom.  By  his  doctrine  of  the  total  inability  of  man,  he 
considered  himself  compelled  to  accept  the  stern  doctrine  of  predesti- 
nation. Afterwards,  however,  he  liberated  himself  from  the  Augus- 
tinian doctrine  of  predestination,  when  he  succeeded  in  harmonizing 
his  new  viewpoint  with  the  doctrine  of  all  hy  grace.  Zwingli  sup- 
ported the  doctrine  of  predestination  as  it  had  been  developed  after 
Augustine,  and  said  also  that  sin  had  been  predetermined.  Cal\tn 
set  forth  that  God,  in  order  to  tear  down  all  human  righteousness  and 
in  accordance  with  His  own  will,  independent  of  any  foreknowledge* 
of  the  belief  or  unbelief  of  man,  had  decided  to  elect  certain  persons 
to  salvation  in  order  to  glorify  His  mercy,  and  to  elect  others  to  con- 
demnation to  glorify  His  righteousness.  Predestination  was  therefore 
unconditional,  and  based  upon  the  absolute  will  of  God  without  ref- 
erence to  the  death  of  Christ.  Christ  died  only  for  the  elect.  Calvin 
was  a  Supralapsarian,  i.  e.,  according  to  his  view,  the  fall  itself  was 
predetermined.  Regeneration  and  predestination  become  almost  iden- 
tical, and  the  elect  cannot  fall.  The  f'ormula  of  Concord  treats  of  the 
doctrine  of  predestination  principally  in  a  broad  sense  and  from  the 
practical  standpoint.  Predestination  is  referred  to  election  and  there- 
fore has  reference  to  those  that  believe.  The  condemnation  of  the 
unbelievers  is  not  an  object  of  predestination.  For  this  reason  rejec- 
tion is  called  reprobatio  and  not  praedestinatio.  In  relation  to  the  evil 
there  is  only  praesciens.  Christ  died  for  all.  The  evangelical  promises 
of  grace  belong  to  all.  There  is  no  secret  decree  concerning  which  we 
need  feel  disturbed.  There  is  no  twofold  call.  It  also  sets  forth  how 
we  become  certain  of  our  election.  We  are  directed  to  the  call  of  God 
and  to  the  means  of  grace.  We  must  look  away  from  ourselves.  Those 
that  believe  and  follow  the  Word  are  the  elect,  etc.  The  following  are 
the  eight  points  in  the  Formula  of  Concord:  1.  That  the  human  race 
is  truly  redeemed  and  reconciled  with  God  through  Christ,  who,  by  His 
faultless  obedience,  suffering  and  death,  has  nerited  for  us  righteous- 
ness which  avails  before  God,  and  eternal  life.  2.  That  such  merit  and 
benefits  of  Christ  is  offered,  presented  and  distributed  to  us  through 


100  'iiikoi,0(;y. 

His  Word  and  Sacraments.  3.  That  He  is  efficacious  and  active  in  us 
by  the  Holy  Ghost  through  the  Word  when  it  is  preached,  heard  and 
pondered,  to  convert  hearts  to  true  repentance  and  preserve  them  in 
the  true  faith.  4.  That  all  those  who  in  true  repentance  receive  Christ 
by  a  true  faith  He  justifies  and  receives  unto  grace,  adoption  and  in- 
heritance of  eternal  life.  5.  That  those  who  are  thus  justified  He  also 
sanctifies  in  love,  as  St.  Paul  (Eph.  1:  4)  says.  6.  That,  in  their  great 
weakness.  He  also  defends  them  against  the  devil,  the  world,  and  the 
flesh,  and  rules  and  leads  them  in  His  ways,  and  when  they  stumble 
raises  them  again  (places  His  liand  beneath  them),  and  under  the 
cross  and  in  temptation  comforts  and  preserves  them  (for  life).  7. 
That  the  good  work  which  He  has  begun  in  them  He  strengthens,  in- 
creases, and  supports  to  the  end,  if  they  observe  God's  Word,  pray 
diligently,  abide  in  God's  goodness  (grace)  and  faitlifully  use  the  gifts 
received.  8.  That  those  whom  He  has  elected,  called  and  justified.  He 
eternally  saves  and  glorifies  in  life  eternal.*  Geriiaru  says:  "Election 
is  the  eternal  decree  of  God  to  justify  and  save  men.  Therefore  also 
He  decreed  from  eternity  to  justify  and  save  only  those  who  will 
believe  (credituros),  and  consequently  He  elected  those  only  whom 
He  foresaw  as  remaining  in  Christ  through  faith.  —  As  Paul  accord- 
ingly declares,  Eph.  1:  4,  that  God  elected  us  in  Christ,  so  he  declares, 
C  Tliess.  2:  13,  that  God  elected  us  in  faith,  since  we  could  not  be 
elected  in  Christ  except  in  view  of  faith  which  embraces  Christ."  t 
Baiek  defines  election:  "Predestination  or  election  can  be  defined  in 
the  stricter  sense  to  be  the  eternal  decree  of  God  by  which  God  in  His 
infinite  mercy  determined  to  give  eternal  salvation  to  all  those,  and 
only  to  those,  of  whom  He  foresaw  that  they  would  believe  in  Christ 
till  the  end,  and  this  for  tlie  sake  of  Christ's  merits,  which  must  be 
apprehended  by  persevering  faitli,  and  foreseen  as  such, — for  the  sake 
of  their  salvation  and  of  His  glory."  J  The  Socinians  adopted  the  view 
of  the  Pelagians  and  rejected  Calvinism  for  the  same  reason  that  the 
Pelagians  rejected  Augustinianism.  At  the  end  of  the  sixteenth  cen- 
tury a  controversy  arose  between  the  Thomists  and  Dominicans  on  the 
one  hand  and  the  Scotists,  Franciscans  and  Jesuits  on  the  other.  The 
former  held  Augustinian  views.  Michael  Bah  s  expressed  himself  in 
favor  of  strict  Augustinian  views  as  against  Semi-Pelagianism,  for 
which  reason  Pope  Pius  V.  condemned  76  propositions  in  his  writings. 
The  Jesuit  Louis  Molina  referred  salvation  to  the  self-determination 
of  man.  God  elects  those  of  whom  He  foresees  that  they  will  fulfill  the 
conditions.  In  his  presentation  he  introduced  into  dogmatic  termi- 
nology the  expression  scicntia  media.  The  controversy  had  no  result. 
During  the  seventeenth   century  controversies   concerning  predestina- 

*  See  Jacobs,  Book  of  Concord,  pp.  652,  653.     Miiller,  Symb.  B.,  II 

Pars,  pp.  707,  708. 

•;•  Gerhard  Loci  Theol.  II,  86,  87. 
t  Baieri  Comp.  Part.  Cap.  12,  §20. 


THE  ETERNAL  PTTRPOSE   OF   GOD.  101 

tion  occurred  within  the  Catholic,  Lutheran  and  Reformed  Churches. 
The  Jansenist  controversy  was  fought  out  in  the  Catholic  Church. 
Cornelius  Jansen  defended  the  strict  Augustinian  system  of  doctrine 
in  his  work  on  Augustine.  He  accepted  a  double  predestination  and 
took  the  view  that  absolute  predetermination  was  founded  in  the  will 
of  God.  Like  Augustine  he  was  an  Infralapsarian.  Blaise  Pascal. 
Arnauld  and  Quesnel  held  Augustinian  views.  The  latter  wrote  an 
exposition  on  the  New  Testament.  Clement  XI.  in  his  Bull  Unigenitus 
condemned  101  propositions  in  Quesnel's  book,  yet  Jansenism  extended 
its  influence  into  the  eighteenth  century.  In  the  Lutheran  Church, 
Samuel  Huher,  who  had  come  from  the  Reformed  Church,  fought 
against  the  Reformed  Particularism  to  such  a  degree  that  he  lapsed 
into  a  species  of  Universalism.  Huber  rejected  the  doctrine  of  the 
Lutheran  theologians,  that  God  elects  only  those  of  whom  He  foresees 
that  they  will  believe.  But  Huber  was  not  consistent,  for  he  said  that 
not  all  would  be  saved,  but  only  those  who  accept  election.  Aegidius 
Hunnius  combated  the  universal  doctrine  of  predestination  that  Huber 
championed.  In  the  Reformed  Church  there  arose  the  controversy  be- 
tween the  Arminians,  who  developed  Semi-Pelagian  tendencies,  and 
the  Gomarists,  who  supported  Calvinism.  The  Arminians.  or  the 
Remonstrants,  taught  concerning  predestination  that  God  through  an 
eternal  and  inscrutable  decree  before  the  foundation  of  the  world  had 
arranged  in  Christ,  on  account  of  Christ,  and  through  Christ,  to  save 
all  those  who  through  the  grace  of  the  Holy  Spirit  believe  in  Christ 
and  persevere  in  this  faith  unto  the  end  of  life.  Besides,  the  con- 
troversy on  predestintion  continued  in  the  Reformed  Church  through 
Amyraldism  and  Pajonism.  Amyraldus  essayed  to  modify  the  strict 
Calvinism  of  the  Synod  of  Dort.  His  doctrine,  which  has  been  called 
universalisfnus  hypotheticus,  contained  a  real  Particularism  and  an 
ideal  Universalism.  God  would  save  all,  but  faith  was  the  condition. 
Man  himself  cannot  fulfill  the  condition.  He  speaks  therefore  of  a 
particularistic  will,  in  accordance  with  which  God  from  eternity  has 
determined  to  save  a  certain  number,  to  whom  He  grants  the  gift  of 
faith.  The  objective  grace  offers  salvation  to  all  on  condition  of  re- 
pentance and  faith.  The  subjective  grace  is  particularistic.  Pa,jon 
accepted  the  doctrine  of  objective  grace,  but  rejected  the  subjective, 
according  to  which  the  Holy  Spirit  acts  immediately  upon  some.  He 
supported  Reformed  determinism  in  the  form  that  conversion  and 
election  depend  on  external  circumstances,  such  as  the  environment  in 
which  the  individual  is  placed. 

Schleiermacher  presented  religion  as  the  feeling  of  absolute  de- 
pendence. He  conceived  of  God  as  causality.  There  was  no  distinction 
between  God's  foreknowledge  and  His  predetermination.  God  had  pre- 
determined both  sin  and  redemption  from  sin.  But  he  translated  the 
Calvinistic  doctrine  of  predestination  into  another  form  that  led  to 
universalism,  if  not  in  this  life,  then  in  eternity.     He  essayed  to  nul- 


102  TTIKOI-OCY. 

lify  the  dualism  in  God's  being  and  in  His  acts,  which  had  clung  to 
the  doctrine  of  predestination.  He  therefore  declared  that  sooner  or 
later  all  men  would  be  saved.  God  has  from  eternitj'  determined  upon 
the  redemption  of  the  human  race;  and  He  carries  out  His  decree, 
albeit  through  a  temporal  election,  so  that  the  one  sooner,  the  other 
later,  becomes  the  object  of  the  practical  application.  Those  that 
cannot  be  reached  in  this  world  become  objects  of  the  same  work  of 
salvation  in  another  world.  Maktexsex  considered  that  predestination 
was  an  eternal  act  and  election  a  temporal  act.  He  rejected  the  ex- 
pressions ex  pra-visa  fide  and  ex  praevisa  incredulitate.  Tmomasii's 
did  not  approve  of  the  division  of  the  will  into  voluntas  antecedens  and 
voluntas  consequens.  Because  the  notion  ex  praevisa  fide  does  not 
enter  into  the  universal  election,  therefore  it  should  not  be  used,  but 
he  approves  of  the  doctrine  of  God's  foreknowledge.  Piiilippi  considers 
that  in  the  foreknowledge  of  God  in  election  is  included  the  passivity 
of  man  in  relation  to  the  proffered  grace.  As  has  been  stated  before, 
a  controversy  concerning  predestination  has  occurred  in  the  Lutheran 
Church  in  the  United  States.  The  main  question  at  issue  concerned 
the  expression  ex  praevisa  fide  or  intuitu  fidei  and  its  significance.  The 
Missouri  Si/nocrs  leading  theologians  did  not  approve  of  the  expression, 
while  on  the  other  hand  the  theologians  of  the  loiva  St/nod  maintained 
strongly  that  the  content  of  this  expression  agreed  with  the  Lutheran 
confession  and  the  development  of  orthodox  theology.  The  Ohio  and 
Iowa  Synods  accused  the  Missouri  Synod  of  Calvinism.  However,  the 
Missouri  Synod  taught  the  universality  of  the  atonement,  as  well  as 
the  universality  and  the  seriousness  of  the  call.  The  Missouri  Synod 
set  forth  with  reference  to  the  merit  of  Christ  that  men  are  pre- 
destined to  faith  in  order  to  be  saved*    The  Iowa  Synod  and  the  others 


*  In  this  note  we  follow  statements  presented  in  'The  Error  of  Mod- 
ern Missouri'  by  Stellhorn  and  Schmidt.  The  sum  and  substance  of 
the  doctrines  of  Walther  and  Modern  Missouri  would  be  the  following: 
"Election  is  the  unalterable  and  eternal  decree  of  God,  by  which,  from 
the  entire  human  race,  according  to  the  free  purpose  of  His  will,  out 
of  pure  grace  and  mercy.  He  ordained  unto  salvation  a  certain  number 
of  persons,  neither  better  or  worthier  than  others,  lying  together  with 
them  in  the  same  universal  destruction."  In  regard  to  the  will  of  God: 
"The  will  of  God,  however,  is  also  itself  not  determined  by  any  other 
will.  Therefore,  because  it  is  already  certain  through  election  that 
a  person  is  to  reach  heaven,  God  foreknows  it."  As  a  judge's  fore- 
knowledge of  the  execution  of  a  criminal  is  conditioned  by  his  fore- 
ordaining the  act,  so  also  God's  foreknowledge  is  'dependent'  upon  His 
foreordination,  and  not  vice  versa.  "All  regard  to  man's  conduct  must 
be  excluded,  also  all  regard  to  faith.  Election  is  conditioned  only  in 
so  far  as  God  has  regarded  Christ's  merit,  obtained  for  all,  and  faith, 
in  so  far  as  He  has  determined  to  give  it  to  the  elect."  Concerning 
the  relation  of  faith  and  election:  "Election  is  the  cause  of  all  that 
takes  place  for  the  salvation  of  the  elect;  it  is  the  cause  that  any  one 
comes  to  repentance."  Missouri  teaches  that  predestination  is  de- 
pendent only  on  the  will  of  God  and  prescient  faith   has  no  bearing. 


^  THE    CREATION.  103 

laid  the  emphasis  on  tlae  fact  tliat  by  virtue  of  or  in  view  of  faith  in 
the  merit  of  Christ  men  are  predestined  to  salvation.  H.  E.  Jacobs, 
having  discussed  the  relation  of  justification  and  election  or  predesti- 
nation, reduces  this  relation  to  a  tabular  form,  using  Paul  as  the  per- 
sonal example:  Paul  was  justified  and  elected  in  view  of  the  merits 
of  Christ  accepted  by  faith;  or,  of  faith  accepting  the  merits  of  Christ. 
The  formula  of  justification  and  that  of  election  are  one  and  the  same. 
Nothing  dare  be  admitted  with  respect  to  justification  which  is  rejected 
with  respect  to  election.  We  also  quote  Dr.  Jacobs'  definition  of  elec- 
tion: "It  is  the  eternal  decree,  purpose  or  decision  of  God,  according 
to  which,  out  of  pure  grace.  He  determined  to  save  out  of  the  fallen, 
condemned  and  helpless  human  race  each  individual,  who  from  eter- 
nity He  foresaw  would,  by  His  grace,  be  in  Christ  unto  the  end  of 
life."    Compare  A  Summary  of  the  Christian  Faith  by  Jacobs,  Chap.  41. 


§8.    THE  CREATION. 

Cosmology  contains  the  doctrine  of  the  universe  and 
COSMOGONY  the  doctrine  of  the  origin  of  the  world.  When 
we  consider  God  as  the  absolute  personality,  we  find  the 
explanation  of  the  truth  of  the  Christian  cosmogony.  The 
Triune  God  is  active  not  only  internally,  but  also  externally. 

Faith  is  the  result  of  election.  "God  has  predestined  us  unto  faith." 
Grace  overcomes  all  opposition.  An  unconditional  election  is  rejected, 
but  it  is  maintained  that  the  conditions  are  expressed  in  this  that  God 
predestines  on  account  of  the  merit  of  Christ,  and  that  He  works 
saving  faith.  The  expression  'ex  prsevisa  fide'  is  rejected  as  implying 
Synergism.  But  the  Lutheran  Church  has  never  taught  that  any  one 
is  saved  propter  fidem,  but  per  fidem  propter  Christum.  In  regard  to 
the  eight  points  in  the  Formula  of  Concord,  Modern  Missouri  holds 
that  they  refer  to  election  in  the  narrow  sense  (Prsedestinatio  stricte 
dicta).  Most  Lutherans  or  nearly  all  except  Modern  Missouri  hold 
that  the  eight  points  refer  to  the  Prsedestinatio  late  dicta. 

In  order  to  know  the  position  of  Missouri  we  also  call  attention  to 
a  booklet  by  Dr.  Pieper  which  bears  the  title,  "Conversion  and  Elec- 
tion." In  this  book  man's  inability  to  convert  himself  is  correctly 
emphasized  and  Calvinism  is  rejected.  But  the  author  gives  no  ex- 
planation why  the  Spirit  works  faith  in  some  except  as  God  has  elected 
them.  He  holds  that  the  election  of  the  finally  saved  is  a  mystery 
and  no  explanation  should  be  attempted.  As  election  and  salvation 
are  accomplished  by  grace  alone,  we  should  not  use  the  expressions 
ex  prfevisa  fide  or  intuitu  fidei,  because  they  are  presumptuous  in 
prying  into  the  mysteries  of  the  divine  decree.  All  men  are  in  the 
same  depravity  and  equally  guilty.  Although  universal  and  serious 
grace  is  recognized,  it  will  always  be  a  mystery  in  this  life  why  some 
should  be  converted  and  saved  rather  than  others.  "When  studying 
the  cause  why  men  are  saved,  we  never  get  beyond  sola  gratia  Dei; 
when  studying  the  cause  why  men  are  lost,  we  never  pass  beyond  sola 
culpa  hominum," 


104  THEOLOGY. 

The  latter  activity  is  not  necessary  in  the  same  sense  as  the 
former.  The  external  activity  is  connected,  however,  with 
the  internal.  Opera  ad  extra,  of  which  creation  is  a  part, 
have  their  starting  point  in  the  opera  ad  intra. 

QUENSTEDT  defines  the  act  of  creation  as  follows:  "Crea- 
tion is  an  external  act- of  the  Triune  God,  ivherehij,  to 
the  praise  of  His  name  and  the  benefit  of  man,  in  the  space 
of  six  days,  by  the  power  alone  of  His  most  free  ivill.  He 
omnipotently  and  tvisely  produced  from  nothing  all  things 
visible  and  invisible." 

The  Triune  God  is  causa  efficiens  principalis.  In  accord- 
ance with  opera  attributiva  in  the  economical  Trinity  crea- 
tion is  indeed  ascribed  to  the  Father  especially,  but  opera 
attributiva  are  communia  or  indivisa,  for  which  reason 
both  the  Son  and  the  Holy  Spirit  participate.  Dog-maticians 
generally  say  therefore  that  the  world  was  created  by  the 
Father,  through  the  Son,  and  in  the  Holy  Spirit.  Because 
the  Son  from  eternity  is  the  image  of  the  Father,  therefore 
the  thoughts  of  the  Father  are  reflected  in  the  Son.  Some 
Dogmaticians  say  therefore  that  the  Son  is  K6afjLo<;  vot/to's. 
He  is  the  principle  of  the  world  through  whom  all  is  made. 
The  world  idea  or  archetype  in  the  Son  is  reflected  in  time 
as  an  image  or  unfolding  portraiture  of  the  divine  world 
plan.  In  creation  as  well  as  in  the  Trinity  the  Holy  Spirit 
occupies  a  position  which  both  unites  and  separates.  Through 
the  activity  of  the  Spirit  in  creation  and  also  in  providence 
the  world  is  transfigured  and  consecrated  to  God,  but  at 
the  same  time  is  separated  from  Him,  so  that  God,  while 
immanent  in  the  world,  is  nevertheless  transcendent,  and 
the  world  does  not,  in  accordance  with  the  acosmism  of  the 
Pantheists,  betome  immanent  in  God.  Because  God  has 
Himself  created  the  world  and  is  the  principal  active  cause, 
there  is  no  causa  instrumentalis.  The  goodness  of  God  alone 
is  the  causa  impulsiva  creationis.  Before  we  proceed  we 
would  cite  the  following  passages:  "Of  him,  and  through 
him,  and  unto  him,  are  all  things'  (Rom.  11:  36)  ;  "To  us 
there  is  one  God,  the  Father,  of  whom  are  all  things"  (1 
Cor.  8:6);  "All  things  were  made  through  him"  (John  1: 


THE  CREATION,  105 

10)  ;  ''For  in  him  were  all  things  created,  in  the  heavens 
and  upon  the  earth,  things  visible  and  things  invisible, 
whether  thrones  or  dominions  or  principalities  or  powers; 
all  things  have  been  created  through  and  unto  him"  (Col.  1 : 
16)  ;  "Who  worketh  all  things  after  the  council  of  his  will" 
(Eph.  1:  11)  ;  "Thou  didst  create  all  things,  and  because 
of  thy  will  they  were,  and  were  created"  (Rev.  4:  11).  Cf. 
Rom.  1 :  19,  20  and  Acts  17 :  26,  21. 

1.    The  Modus  of  Creation. 

Forma  creationis  consists  in  the  external  act,  through 
which  God  partly  from  nothing  and  partly  out  of  the  cre- 
ated material  brought  forth  all  things.  For  this  reason 
creation  is  divided  into  creatio  prima  or  immediata  and 
creatio  secunda  or  mediata. 

The  scholastics  of  the  Middle  Ages  distinguished  between 
nihilum  privativum,  the  chaotic  material,  and  nihilum  nega- 
tivum,  which  even  excludes  the  former,  and  taught  there- 
fore that  God  had  created  the  world  ex  nihilo  negativo.  In 
the  Lutheran  scholastic  period  Quenstedt  changed  ex  to 
post.  In  explanation  of  the  expression  "from"  or  "out  of 
nothing"  the  following  may  be  cited :  "By  faith  we  under- 
stand that  the  worlds  have  been  framed  by  the  word  of 
God  so  that  what  is  seen  hath  not  been  made  out  of  things 
which  appear"  (Heb.  11:  3).  There  was,  therefore,  no 
prima  materia,  which  God  used  in  creatio  prima.  But  God 
did  not  create  the  world  out  of  nothing  in  the  ordinary 
sense,  for  it  is  stated  that  the  worlds  have  been  framed 
by  the  Word  of  God.  Viewed  from  this  angle,  theology  does 
not  conflict  with  the  expression:  ex  nihilo  nihil  fit.  We 
may  therefore  say,  ex  aliquo  aliquid  fit.  Of  course  those 
that  continually  urge  the  principle  ex  nihilo  nihil  fit  deny 
that  the  world  was  created  by  the  Word  of  God.  Against 
such  we  must  emphasize  the  fact  that  the  world  was  created 
from  nothing.  On  the  other  hand,  when  we  set  forth  that 
the  world  was  created  by  the  Word  of  God,  we  must  beware 
of  theosophical  speculations,  which  assert  that  in  God  there 


106  THEOLOCY. 

is  a  real  ^u'o-i?  with  potentialities  which  constitutes  the  ma- 
terial of  creation.  Against  such  we  must  maintain  that 
God  created  the  world  from  nothing  by  His  Word. 

To  be  sure,  we  cannot  explain  the  mystery  of  creation, 
for  we  know  only  in  part.  Through  experience  we  find, 
however,  that  the  spiritual  forces  are  the  most  powerful. 
The  spirit  of  man,  although  finite  and  dependent,  is  never- 
theless a  great  power  in  the  world  of  nature.  We  can 
therefore  without  difficulty  understand  how  God,  the  in- 
finite and  independent  Spirit,  can  be  almighty. 

The  world  is,  therefore,  not  eternal,  either  as  cosmos  or  as 
alwv.  This  we  learn  in  the  first  sentence  on  the  first  page 
of  the  Bible  through  the  word  bereshith.  The  same  truth 
is  expressed  in  other  places,  such  as  Eph.  1 :  4,  where  we 
read:  before  the  foundation  of  the  world.  With  regard  to 
the  time  and  the  creation  of  the  world  the  old  Dogmaticians 
taught  that  God  created  the  world  with  time.  HOLLAZius 
says :  in  tempore  non  praeexistente,  sed  coexistente." 

We  find  two  accounts  of  the  creation  in  Genesis.  The 
object  of  the  first  account  is  to  present  the  order  of  crea- 
tion, for  which  reason  man,  who  was  created  when  all  was 
ready,  is  mentioned  last,  because  he  was  the  crown  of  crea- 
tion. In  the  second  account  the  creation  of  man  is  pre- 
sented more  in  detail,  while  we  are  told  how  the  garden  of 
Eden  was  planted  for  his  sake.  No  mention  is  made  in  this 
account  of  the  creation  of  flora  and  fauna.  We  are  told 
that  the  animals  that  had  been  created  were  brought  before 
man  that  he  might  name  them,  etc.  With  regard  to  the 
Biblical  accounts  of  the  creation  and  the  scientific  presenta- 
tions on  the  subject,  there  have  been  many  attempts  to 
harmonize  the  two.  Although  the  Bible  is  not  a  textbook 
in  the  natural  sciences,  still  it  ought  to  be  considered  norma- 
tive. It  has  often  happened  that  science  has  been  compelled 
to  acknowledge  the  truth  of  the  declarations  of  the  Word 
of  God,  although  the  Bible  does  not  express  the  truths  in 
the  same  terms  as  science  employs,  but  makes  use  of  the 
language  of  the  common  man.  Among  the  explanations 
that  have  been  advanced,  three  may  be  mentioned.     There 


THE    CREATION.  107 

are  some  who  consider  that  the  days  of  creation  were  ex- 
tended periods  of  time,  by  which  theory  it  has  been  sought 
to  harmonize  the  teachings  of  the  Bible  with  geological 
science.  According  to  this  theory  a  day  might  be  a  thou- 
sand years  or  thousands  of  years.  Others  say  that  the  first 
three  days  were  long  periods,  but  that  the  last  three  were 
ordinary  days.  Still  others  present  the  view  that  the  de- 
mands of  science  might  be  met  by  placing  the  period  of 
the  geological  formations  before  the  first  day  of  creation 
as  set  forth  in  Genesis.  The  first  thing  that  is  presented  in 
Genesis  before  the  days  of  creation  are  mentioned  is  that 
i7i  the  heginning  God  created  the  heavens  and  the  earth,  and 
that  the  earth  was  waste  and  void.  It  is  not  impossible  that 
an  extended  period  of  time  may  have  intervened  before  the 
first  day  of  creation  when  light  was  made.  According  to 
this  view  the  remaining  days  of  creation  were  ordinary 
days.  The  first  of  these  theories  is  probably  the  most  popu- 
lar, while  the  third  contains  the  suggestion  of  a  harmony 
that  is  the  most  satisfactory  to  the  Christian  thinker.  It 
is  set  forh  and  defended  by  Kurtz  in  a  most  admirable  way. 
However,  the  last  and  deciding  word  has  not  been  uttered 
in  this  question.  The  diff'erent  harmonies  that  have  been 
attempted  have  considerable  importance  in  the  service  of 
Apologetics.  When  geology  and  astronomy  have  reached  a 
greater  degree  of  exactitude  and  perfection,  then  we  shall 
find  that  the  facts  of  science  will  not  conflict  with  the 
Biblical  account. 

In  regard  to  the  first  of  these  theories  we  would  be  just 
in  calling  attention  to  the  fact  that  "yom,'  the  Hebrew  word 
for  day,  transliterated  to  English,  has  several  meanings. 
In  Gen.  1 :  5  it  means  an  ordinary  day  and  also  day  and 
night.  In  Gen.  2:  4  day  means  all  the  six  days.  The  day 
of  salvation  is  not  an  ordinary  day.  It  may  be  questioned, 
if  the  seventh  day  was  an  ordinary  day  of  twelve  hours. 
We  should  also  pay  attention  to  2  Peter  3 :  8,  "But  forget 
not  this  one  thing,  beloved,  that  one  day  is  with  the  Lord 
as  a  thousand  years,  and  a  thousand  years  as  one  day." 
In  regard  to  the  words  "in  the  beginning"  or  "to  begin  with 


108  THICOLOGY. 

God  created  heaven  and  earth,"  we  should  not  forget  that 
not  only  heaven,  but  also  earth  has  various  meanings.  In 
the  first  verse  "earth"  is  a  chaotic  matter  or  mass  and  in 
the  second  verse  "earth"  means  evidently  not  only  the  planet 
earth,  but  also  the  beginning  of  the  formation  of  the  solar 
and  stellar  systems.  On  the  fourth  day  of  creation  the  sun, 
moon  and  stars  were  made  visible.  But  light  existed  also 
in  itself  from  the  first  day.  At  first  vegetation  did  not  de- 
pend upon  sunlight,  but  upon  the  original  created  light  or 
a  phase  of  it.  The  contents  of  the  second  verse  are  also 
corroborated  by  2  Peter  3 :  5,  "There  were  heavens  from  of 
old,  and  an  earth  compacted  out  of  water  and  amidst  water." 
In  that  time  or  period  the  Spirit  of  God  was  brooding  (ac- 
cording to  the  Hebrew)  on  the  waters.  Then  the  implanting 
took  place  which  explains  the  repeated  "after  their  kind" 
during  the  days  of  creation.  But  the  expression  is  not  used 
in  relation  to  man,  because  he  was  created  directly.  There 
are  consequently  no  data  in  Genesis  to  support  pseudo- 
evolution.  The  Biblical  narrative  of  creation  only  contains 
an  outline,  but  will  stand  the  test  of  true  science.* 

The  record  of  creation  was  given  to  man  by  revelation, 
either  directly  or  by  vision,  just  as  John  received  the  revela- 
tion of  the  end  of  the  world  and  the  genesis  of  the  new 
heaven  and  the  new  earth. 

Concerning  the  modus  of  creation  many  different  theories 
have  been  presented  in  the  world  of  science.  Many  scientists 
accept  the  theory  of  Laplace,  according  to  which  our  solar 
system  is  supposed  to  have  developed  out  of  a  greatly  at- 
tenuated gaseous  mass.  He  considered  that  this  mass  was 
like  star  clusters.  Many  of  these  nebulse  are  supposed  by 
astronomers  to  be  fixed  stars.  Laplace  said  that  in  the 
motions  of  the  heavenly  bodies  the  nebulous  rings  that  en- 
circled the  planets  were  thrown  off  into  space  and  after- 
wards formed  separate  bodies.  The  ring  of  Saturn  is  con- 
sidered a  proof  of  this  theory.  The  gaseous  mass,  once  at 
white  heat,  afterwards  cooled  and  became  solid. 

♦  Compare  Lindberg's  Apologetics,  p.  41. 


THE   CREATIOX.  109 

It  is  probably  not  within  the  province  of  Dogmatics  to 
account  for  theories  of  this  sort,  but  it  is  nevertheless  per- 
missible to  state  them,  particularly  as  they  do  not  decidedly 
conflict  with  the  clear  expressions  of  the  Bible.  It  is  also 
necessary  at  least  to  point  out  such  theories  as  plainly  con- 
flict with  the  Scriptures.  Among  theories  of  this  sort, 
which  must  be  rejected,  may  be  mentioned:  1)  The  theory 
of  emmmtion,  in  accordance  with  which  all  creation  has 
emanated  from  God  as  the  stream  from  its  source  or  the 
rays  from  the  sun.  In  this  way  God  Himself  becomes  ma- 
terial and  imperfect.  2)  Hylozoism,  which  acknowledges 
a  formative  principle,  but  ascribes  it  to  matter.  God  is 
simply  a  force  or  world-soul.  This  theory  has  made  its 
appearance  in  many  forms.  Straton  of  Lampsacus,  the 
Stoics,  the  disciples  of  Plotinus,  Spinoza  and  others  have 
presented  this  theory  which  implies  either  Pantheism  or 
Atheism.  3)  Materialism,  which  declares  that  only  matter 
exists.  Matter  is  eternal  and  all  things  are  explained 
through  mutations  of  matter,  hence  the  theory  does  not 
acknowledge  any  real  creation.  4)  The  Evolutionary  The- 
ory, or  Darwin's  doctrine  of  transmutation,  according  to 
which  the  universe  has  resulted  from  a  gradual  develop- 
ment of  natural  forces  which  has  continued  through  count- 
less ages. 

There  is  a  true  evolution  which  implies  a  development 
within  the  homogeneous  domain,  but  pseudo-evolution 
means  the  transmutation  of  the  homogeneous  into  the 
heterogeneous.  The  extreme  pseudo-evolution  as  presented 
by  such  men  as  Hseckel  denies  a  Creator.  But  the  theory 
of  pseudo-evolution  has  not  been  proved.  No  naturalist  has 
been  able  to  discover  an  actual  transmutation  of  species. 
Agazziz  says :  "Darwinism  is  an  a  priori  conception  and  a 
burlesque  of  facts.'  ViRCHOW  says:  "I  am  of  the  opinion 
that,  before  we  designate  such  hypotheses  as  the  voice  of 
science,  we  should  first  have  to  conduct  a  long  series  of 
elaborate  investigations.  We  must  therefore  say  to  teachers 
in  schools,  'Do  not  teach  it.' ...  Of  spontaneous  generation 
we  do  not  possess  any  actual  proof."    If  the  doctrine  be  true, 


110  THKOI.OCY. 

it  should  be  supported  by  a  multitude  of  sure  facts  like  the 
law  of  gravitation. 

2.    The  Effectus  of  Creation. 

Effectus  creationis  is  all  that  has  been  created,  both 
the  visible  world  and  the  invisible.  The  earth  itself  reveals 
to  us  the  great  works  of  God,  and  with  the  growth  of  human 
knowledge  the  wonders  of  creation  become  more  and  more 
marvelous.  But  the  eye  of  man  pierces  through  the  firma- 
ment and  views  and  contemplates  the  thousands  of  worlds 
in  the  wide  universe.  Concerning  the  heavens  Dogmaticians 
make  use  of  the  following  division:  1)  coeliim  physicum, 
which  includes  serum  et  aethereum;  2)  coelum  angelorum 
et  heatorum,  the  home  of  the  angels  and  the  saints,  where 
the  Lord  reveals  Himself,  which  is  also  called  Paradise  and 
constitutes  one  of  the  many  mansions;  3)  coelum  Dei  ma- 
jestaticum,  where  God  is  enthroned  in  everlasting  glory 
and  light.  The  Scriptures  also  mention  terra  nova  et  coelum 
novum,  which  implies  a  new  creation  or  at  least  a  trans- 
formation. 

The  following  passages  may  be  quoted :  "For  in  him  were 
all  things  created,  in  the  heavens  and  upon  the  earth,  things 
visible  and  things  invisible"  (Col.  1:  16)  ;  "And  God  called 
the  firmament  Heaven"  (Gen.  1:8);  "Behold  the  heaven 
and  the  heaven  of  heavens"  (Deut.  10  :  14)  ;  "In  my  Father's 
house  are  many  mansions"  (John  14:  1)  ;  "Caught  up  even 
to  the  third  heaven,  caught  up  into  Paradise"  (2  Cor.  12: 
2 — 4)  ;  "But  ye  are  come  unto  the  city  of  the  living  God, 
the  heavenly  Jerusalem,  and  to  innumerable  hosts  of  angels, 
to  the  general  assembly  and  church  of  the  firstborn"  (Heb. 
12:  22,  23)  ;  "Dwelling  in  light  unapproachable"  (1  Tim.  6: 
16)  ;  "The  city  which  hath  the  foundations,  whose  builder 
and  maker  is  God"  (Heb.  11:  10)  ;  "He  that  sitteth  on  the 
throne  said,  Behold,  I  make  all  things  new"  (Rev.  21 :  5). 

3.    The  Objects  of  Creation. 

P^INIS  creationis  is  twofold  and  the  two  objects  must  not 
be  separated  from  each  other.     The  objects  are:    1)   finis 


THE   CREATION.  Ill 

intermedius,  which  has  reference  to  the  blessedness  and  wel- 
fare of  man.  When  the  decree  concerning  creation  and  there- 
fore finis  intermedius  by  reason  of  sin  could  not  be  realized 
in  accordance  with  the  original  plan,  then  God  nevertheless 
carries  out  His  purpose  according  to  the  decree  of  salvation 
and  realizes  finis  intermedius  in  relation  to  all  those  that 
have  been  made  new  creatures  through  faith  in  Christ; 
2)  finis  ultimus,  which  is  the  glory  of  God. 

The  following  passages  set  forth  finis  intermedius  and 
ultimus :  "He  made  of  one  every  nation  of  men  to  dwell  on 
the  face  of  the  earth"  (Acts  17 :  26)  ;  compare  Rom.  1 :  25 ; 
"The  heavens  declare  the  glory  of  God  and  the  firmament 
showeth  his  handiwork"  (Ps.  19:  1)  ;  "Jehovah  hath  made 
everything  for  its  own  end"  (Proverbs  16:  4);  compare 
Rev.  4:  11. 

4.    Notes  on  the  History  of  Dogma. 

The  earliest  Christian  Church  in  general  accepted  with 
childlike  faith  the  Mosaic  account  of  creation  and  rejected 
the  teachings  of  the  Gnostics  concerning  a  creator  of  the 
world  as  distinguished  from  the  highest  God.  They  also 
rejected  their  doctrine  of  an  eternal  creation.  The  Alex- 
andrian school  was  more  speculative.  The  allegorical 
method  came  into  use  with  Origen,  whose  views  in  general 
on  this  subject  were  contested  by  Methodius  and  rejected 
by  Athanasius.  Augustine's  views  were  characterized  by 
spiritualistic  tendencies.  During  the  Scholastic  period  a 
pantheistic  tendency  began  to  make  itself  felt  through 
Scotus  Erigena,  but  did  not  gain  many  followers.  The 
orthodox  faith  prevailed.  If  some  of  the  mystics  were  in 
danger  of  being  led  astray  by  their  speculations,  they  were 
generally  strengthened  in  their  faith  by  the  consideration 
of  the  marvelous  wonders  of  God  in  creation.  Through  the 
Reformation  and  the  subsequent  development  of  orthodox 
dogmatic  theology  faith  in  the  teachings  of  the  Bible  con- 
cerning creation  was  confirmed.  The  Socinians  do  not  seem 
to  have  held  the  view  of  a  creatio  ex  nihilo,  while  the  modern 


112  THEX)LOGY. 

mystics  occupied  themselves  more  or  less  with  theosophical 
and  pantheistic  speculations.  The  Wolffian  school  sought 
indeed  to  harmonize  the  Mosaic  account  with  natural  phil- 
osophy, but  the  old  struggle  still  continues,  which  is  not  to 
be  wondered  at,  when  we  consider  the  influence  of  Panthe- 
ism and  Materialism  in  the  modern  critical  period.  Schleier- 
macher  became  a  new  Origen.  The  number  of  those,  how- 
ever, that  maintain  and  vigorously  struggle  for  the  con- 
servative faith  is  very  large. 

Heathenism  does  not  seem  able  to  reach  a  clear  conception  of  the 
creation  of  the  world.  The  great  heathen  philosopher  Plato  held  the 
view  that  creation  was  merely  the  activity  of  the  eternal  Idea  in  rela- 
tion to  matter.  The  Creator  was  the  Demiurge  or  architect  who 
plastically  wrought  His  ideas  into  the  formless  eternal  mass. 

Justin  Martyr  says  in  his  first  Apology,  X,  that  God  created  the 
world  from  formless  material.  He  does  not  declare  with  sufficient 
clearness  that  God  also  created  the  hyle.  Hermogenes  taught  that 
God  created  the  world  out  of  pre-existing  material,  which  is  tanta- 
mount to  an  external  world-creation.  The  hyle  is  as  eternal  as  God 
Himself.  Tertullian  opposed  his  views.  Origen  said  that  other  worlds 
had  existed  before  this  one.  God  could  not  remain  inactive.  He  denied 
the  eternity  of  matter  in  the  heathen  sense,  but  taught,  nevertheless, 
an  eternal  world-creation. 

The  Neo-Platonists,  like  Pi.oTiNr.s.  taught  that  the  world  of  ideas, 
the  divine  intellect,  was  the  mediating  principle  in  the  formation  of 
the  world.  The  higher  powers  of  nature  give  form  and  life  to  the 
lifeless  material.  Athanasivs  rejected  the  doctrine  of  eternal  matter, 
and  said  that  the  result  of  such  a  doctrine  would  be  to  make  God 
powerless  and  merely  an  artist.  Augustine  rejected  the  doctrine  of  an 
eternal  world-creation.  In  answer  to  those  who  asked  what  God  did 
before  He  created  the  heavens  and  the  earth  he  says  in  his  Conf.,  XI: 
12:  "I  do  not  answer,  as  a  certain  person  is  said  to  have  done,  dodging 
the  question:  He  was  busy  preparing  hell  for  those  that  delved  too 
deep  in  mysteries,  for  I  should  rather  have  answered:  I  do  not  know," 
etc.  He  says  that  God  could  have  created  all  things  at  one  time,  but 
because  of  our  limitations  He  extended  the  creation  over  several  days. 
He  explained  the  history  of  creation  itself  in  an  allegorical  way. 

John  Scotur  Erigena  conceived  of  God  both  as  natura  creans,  sed 
non  creata,  and  as  natura  non  creata  et  non  creans.  And  yet  he  says 
that  the  nothing  from  which  God  created  the  world  was  His  super- 
essential  glory.  God  is  in  all  things,  which  is  equivalent  to  saying 
that  God  has  made  all.  Thomas  Aquina.s  said  that  the  creation  of  the 
world  was  an  article  of  faith.     He  seems  to  have  inclined  to  the  theory 


PROVIDENCE.  113 

of  emanation.  God's  object  in  creating  tlie  world  was  to  impart  His 
being.  The  power  of  God  was  causa  efficiens,  His  wisdom  causa  ex- 
emplaris,  and  His  goodness  causa  finalis. 

Mystics  like  Sebastian  Frank  and  Bölime  taught  that  the  essence  of 
God  develops  itself  in  creation.  BiiiiME  said  that  the  nature  of  God 
was  the  substance  from  which  all  things  were  created.  Spinoza  set 
forth  that  the  substance  was  never  without  its  modi,  natura  naturans 
never  without  natura  naturata.  It  is  not  necessary  in  this  connection 
to  present  anything  further  on  Pantheism. 

It  is  self-evident  that  Schelling,  Fichte  and  Hegel  held  anti-Christian 
views  on  creation.  Darwin  set  forth  that  the  floral  and  animal  king- 
doms resulted  from  an  evolution  out  of  a  few  primitive  types.  Schleier- 
MACHEK  rejected  the  doctrine  of  a  creation.  Martensen  follows  Böhme 
in  the  doctrine  of  a  <J3vaL^  in  the  being  of  God,  an  impersonal  essence, 
not  dead  matter,  but  something  real,  a  ttkrjpoifxa,  which  made  creation 
possible.  The  Finnish  theologian  Granfelt  says  that  the  creation  pro- 
ceeded out  of  the  free  love  of  God.  The  conception  of  the  world  crea- 
tion implies  that  God  through  His  almighty  mandate  called  the  world 
into  being,  whose  foundation  is  in  Him,  and  to  which  He  ultimately 
imparts  Himself.  There  has  been  no  real  development  in  the  formula- 
tion of  dogmas  in  recent  times.  The  leading  theologians  of  the  Church 
have  defended  the  conservative  faith,  and  in  the  interest  of  peace  some 
have  endeavored  to  harmonize  the  Biblical  doctrine  with  the  so-called 
facts  of  science. 


§9.    PROVIDENCE. 

Providence  stands  in  the  most  intimate  connection  with 
creation.  It  lies  in  the  nature  of  the  case  that  the  One  who 
created  the  world  also  should  exercise  care  over  His  crea- 
tion so  as  to  sustain  it  and  to  direct  it  to  the  end  that  was 
purposed.  For  this  reason  the  Creator  may  work  concur- 
rently with  the  laws  of  nature  or  He  may  intervene  imme- 
diately. Providence  implies  God's  imrnanence,  which  is  em- 
phasized against  the  Deists,  and  God's  transcendence,  which 
is  emphasized  against  the  Pantheists.  The  presence  of  God 
is  an  adessentia  ad  creaturas  substantialis  or  immediatio 
suppositi  and  presentia  operativa  or  immediatio  virtutis. 
With  regard  to  the  mode  of  activity  Providence  may  be  di- 
vided into  two  main  divisions :  providentia  ordinaria  and 
providentia  extraordinaria.  In  general  by  Providence  is 
meant  only  providentia  ordinaria. 


114 


I.    Providentia  Ordinaria  or  Mediata. 

1.     THE  DEFINITION  OF  PROVIDENCE.  • 

Providentia  ix  that  act  of  God,  by  which  He  cares  for 
the  ivorld,  so  that  He  preserves,  co-operates  with  and  gor- 
erns  all  things  for  the  welfare  of  all.  Quenstedt^'"  defines 
providentia  as  follows:  "Providence  is  the  external  action 
of  the  entire  Trinity,  whereby  God  most  efficaciously  up- 
holds the  things  created,  both  as  an  entirety  and  singly, 
both  in  species  and  in  individuals;  concurs  in  their  actions 
and  results ;  and  freely  and  wisely  governs  all  things  to  His 
own  glory  and  the  welfare  and  safety  of  the  universe,  and 
especially  of  the  godly." 

Providence  includes  the  following  determining  factors : 
a)  TT/joyi'wo-is ,  or  that  God  foreknows  what  is  beneficial  for 
His  creatures;  b)  Trp60tai<;,  or  the  decree  by  which  He  wills 
to  realize  the  things  which  He  foresees  to  be  best;  c)8tot'K7;o-is, 
or  Providence  proper,  which  implies  the  carrying  out  of  the 
decree. 

Apart  from  the  clear  expressions  of  the  Scriptures  con- 
cerning the  Providence  of  God  the  following  arguments 
have  been  used  to  prove  that  God  cares  for  His  creation : 
1)  the  theological  or  metaphysical,  which  implies  that  God 
by  reason  of  His  goodness,  wisdom  and  immutability  must 
care  for  all  things  and  direct  all  to  the  end  for  which  they 
were  created;  2)  the  teleological  or  physical,  by  which  we 
reach  the  conclusion  that  God  cares  for  His  creation  on 
account  of  the  adaptability  of  means  to  ends  in  the  world, 
in  world  development  and  in  history;  3)  the  moral,  based 
upon  the  holiness  and  righteousness  of  God,  making  it  im- 
perative for  Him  to  rule  in  accordance  with  these  attributes, 
so  that  the  virtuous  are  rewarded  and  the  wicked  punished ; 
4)  the  religious  experimental  proof,  which  in  a  certain 
sense  may  be  called  the   Christian   historical  proof.     All 

*  Quenstedt:  "Providentia  est  actio  externa  totius  Trinitatis,  qua  res 
a  se  conditas  universas  ac  singulas  tarn  quoad  speciem  quam  quoad 
individua  potentissime  conservat  inque  eorum  actiones  et  effectus  coin- 
fluit  et  libere  ac  sapienter  omnia  gubernat  ad  sui  gloriam  et  universi 
huius  atque  imprimis  piorum  utilitatem  ac  salutem." 


PROVIDENCE.  115 

Christians  have,  to  a  smaller  or  greater  extent,  experienced 
the  Providence  of  God. 

The  following  theories  must  be  rejected:  1)  Fatalism, 
which  sets  forth  that  all  things  happen  by  blind  necessity, 
so  that  the  world  is  not  governed  by  an  intelligent  and  lov- 
ing being.  2)  Mechanism,  presented  by  the  Deists,  which 
implies  that  all  things  are  governed  by  the  laws  of  nature, 
so  that  God  never  acts  directly.  3)  Casualism,  which  de- 
clares that  all  is  governed  by  chance  or  accident.  4)  Occa- 
sionalism, presented  by  Descartes,  Melbranche  and  others, 
in  accordance  with  which  God  is  the  immediate  and  only 
cause  of  all  that  happens,  so  that  the  creatures  merely  afford 
God  the  opportunity  to  act,  while  they  themselves  are  pow- 
erless to  concur. 

The  expression  Providence  does  not  occur  in  the  canonical 
books  of  the  Bible,  but  what  is  implied  in  the  expression  is 
a  universal  teaching  of  the  Scriptures.  Of.  Wis.  14 :  3.  The 
expression  is  based  upon  Gen.  22:  8,  14:  "God  will  provide 
himself  the  lamb .  .  .  Abraham  called  the  name  of  that  place 
Jehovah-jireh:  as  it  is  said  to  this  day,  In  the  mount  of 
Jehovah  it  shall  be  provided."  Providence  is  really  ascribed 
to  the  Father,  but  is  the  common  opus  ad  extra  of  the 
Trinity.  For  this  reason  the  three  persons  are  mentioned 
as  working:  ''Jesus  answered  them.  My  Father  worketh 
even  until  now,  and  I  work"  (John  5  :  17)  ;  "In  him  all  things 
consist"  (Col.  1 :  17)  ;  "Upholding  all  things  by  the  word  of 
his  power"  (Heb.  1:3);  "Thou  sendest  forth  thy  Spirit, 
they  are  created"  (Ps.  104:  30). 

2.     THE  OBJECT  OF  PROVIDENCE. 

All  creation  and  especially  man  is  the  object  of  God's 
providential  care.  The  object  therefore  includes  all  things, 
both  great  and  small,  the  whole  complex  of  creation  as  well 
as  the  individual.  Some  one  has  said  that  God  is  maximus 
in  minimo.  "Who  is  like  unto  Jehovah  our  God,  that  hath 
set  his  seat  on  high,  that  humbleth  himself  to  behold  the 
things  that  are  in  heaven  and  in  the  earth?    He  raiseth  up 


116  THEOLOGY. 

the  poor  out  of  the  dust,  and  lifteth  up  the  needy  from  the 
dunghill"  (Ps.  113:  5—7).  Cf.  Ps.  104.  "Are  not  two 
sparrows  sold  for  a  penny?  and  not  one  of  them  shall  fall 
on  the  ground  without  your  Father"  (Matt.  10:  29).  Al- 
though the  Providence  of  God  is  manifested  to  all,  still  it 
differs  with  regard  to  the  objects,  hence  the  following  divi- 
sion :  a)  providentia  generalis,  where  the  object  is  all  crea- 
tion. ''Jehovah  is  good  to  all ;  and  his  tender  mercies  are 
over  all  his  works"  (Ps.  145:  9)  ;  "He  giveth  to  the  beast 
his  food,  and  to  the  young  ravens  which  cry"  (Ps.  147:  9). 
Cf.  Acts  14:  17;  Col.  1:  17,  etc.  b)  providentia  specialis, 
or  God's  special  care  of  man.  "He  maketh  his  sun  to  rise 
on  the  evil  and  the  good,  and  sendeth  rain  on  the  just  and 
the  unjust"  (Matt.  5:  45)  ;  ''In  him  we  live,  and  move,  and 
have  our  being"  (Acts  17:  28)  ;  c)  provideyitia  specialis- 
sima,  or  the  special  care  of  the  faithful.  "But  the  very 
hairs  of  your  head  are  all  numbered"  (Matt.  10:  30)  ;  "To 
them  that  love  God  all  things  work  together  for  good" 
(Rom.  8:  28)  ;  "Specially  of  them  that  believe"  (1  Tim.  4: 
10)  ;  "For  the  sake  of  them  that  shall  inherit  salvation" 
(Heb.  1:  14),  etc. 

3.      THE  SPECIAL  ACTS  OF  PROVIDENCE. 

Forma  providentia  is  divided  into  three  acts:  conserva- 
tio,  concursus  and  guhernatio. 

A.  Coiiservatio  or  Preservati07i. 
QUENSTEDT*  defines  as  follows:  "Preservation  is  that 
act  of  divine  providence  bij  which  God,  as  He  ivills,  pre- 
serves all  things  created  by  Him  in  their  7iatural  essence 
and  with  the  natural  attributes  ayid  powers  that  they  re- 
ceived at  their  first  production."  This  act  of  God  is  not 
to  be  considered  negatively  only,  so  that  in  His  preservation 
of  the  world  He  should  merely  have  bestowed  the  powers 
necessary  for  their  unobstructed  activity,  but  preservation 

*  Qi'KNSTKivr:  "Conservatio  est  actus  divinae  providenticP,  quo  Deus 
res  onines  a  se  creatas  in  sue  esse  natura  et  naturalibus  proprietatibus 
vX.  viribus,  quos  in  prima  sui  productione  acceperunt,  conservat 
quousque  vult." 


PROVIDENCE.  117 

is  also  positive  and  direct,  so  that  God  in  a  real  sense  is 
present  and  works.  Preservation  consists  of  two  parts:  a) 
conservatio  materim  or  the  preservation  of  the  original  mat- 
ter, and  b)  conservatio  formse  or  the  preservation  of  the 
form  in  order  that  cosmos  may  not  return  to  chaos. 

The  following  passages  may  be  observed:  "These  wait 
all  for  thee,  that  thou  mayest  give  them  their  food  in  due 
season"  (Ps.  104:  27)  ;  "Thou  hast  established  the  earth, 
and  it  abideth"  (Ps.  119:  90)  ;  "Upholding  all  things  by  the 
word  of  his  power"  (Heb.  1:3). 

B.    Concursus  or  Concurrence. 

The  co-operation  of  God  enters  into  both  preservation 
and  government,  but  Dogmaticians  have  considered  that 
concurrence  should  especially  be  emphasized  in  order  to 
counteract,  on  the  one  hand,  the  false  doctrine  of  transcend- 
ence of  the  Deists,  and  on  the  other,  the  misleading  doctrine 
of  immanence  of  the  Pantheists.  CONCURSUS  is  the  action 
of  the  Triune  God  in  providence,  by  luhich  He,  as  the  pri- 
mary cause,  concurs  ivith  the  secondary  cauaes  in  accord- 
ance with  their  7iature.  The  definition  of  Quenstedt*  is  as 
follows :  "Concurrence  is  the  act  of  the  divine  Providence 
by  which  God  exercises  a  general  influence  on  the  actions 
and  effects  of  the  secondary  causes,  through  which  He 
quietly  influences  such  immediately  by  Himself  and  at  the 
same  time  with  them,  according  to  the  need  and  require- 
ment of  each." 

The  action  is  produced  not  by  God  alone,  nor  yet  by  the 
secondary  cause,  but  by  both  at  the  same  time.  By  way  of 
illustration  it  may  be  mentioned  how  in  writing  the  hand 
and  the  pen  are  active  at  the  same  time.  The  co-operation 
of  God  is  accommodated  to  the  nature  of  the  active  objects. 
For  this  reason  Hollazius  says :  "With  necessary  agents 
God  concurs  uniformly,  e.  g.,  with  fire,  in  order  for  it  to 

*  QuENSTEiyr:  "Concursus  est  actus  providentiae  divine,  quo  Deus 
influxu  general!  in  actiones  et  effectus  causarum  secundarum,  qua 
tales,  se  Ipso  immediate  et  simul  cum  iis  et  juxta  indigentiam  et  exi- 
gentiam  uniuscujusque  suaviter  influit." 


118  THEOLOGY, 

burn,  with  the  sun,  in  order  for  it  to  shine.  With  free 
agents  God  concurs  variously,  leaving  to  them  their  free 
decision  and  the  free  power  to  choose  this  or  that;  for  the 
order  that  God  has  once  established  He  does  not  easily 
change."  TOLETUS  says  that  God  co-operates  with  the  free 
in  a  free  way,  necessarily  with  the  necessary,  feebly  with 
the  feeble  and  vigorously  with  the  vigorous. 

In  substance  Hollazius  sets  forth  the  following:*  That 
God  co-operates  with  creation  by  the  immediacy  of  His  be- 
ing and  power.  He  concurs  by  reason  of  immediatio  sup- 
positi  and  immediatio  virtutis.  A  person  is  said  to  act 
immediately,  either  exclusively  or  inclusively.  Exclusively, 
when  he  acts  alone;  inclusively,  when  he  concurs  or  co- 
operates. God's  immediate  influence  upon  creation  is  not 
exclusive,  but  inclusive. 

Among  the  Biblical  passages  that  set  forth  God's  con- 
currence may  be  quoted :  "Am  I  a  God  at  hand,  saith  Je- 
hovah, and  not  a  God  afar  off?"  (Jer.  23:  23)  ;  "In  him  we 
live,  and  move,  and  have  our  being"  (Acts  17:  28)  ;  "The 
same  God  worketh  all  things  in  all"  (1  Cor.  12:  6)  ;  "For  it 
is  God  who  worketh  in  you  both  to  will  and  to  work,  for 
his  good  pleasure"  (Phil.  2:  13). 

The  most  difficult  problem  for  Dogmatics  to  solve  in 
relation  to  this  question  is  to  exhibit  the  method  of  divine 
concurrence  in  the  evil  actions  of  men.  God  can,  of  course, 
do  no  evil.  In  order  to  determine  the  relationship  between 
the  concurrence  of  God  and  the  evil  the  Dogmaticians  have 
made  use  of  the  following  terms:  concurrit  Deus  ad  ma- 
teriale,  non  ad  formale  or  ad  effectum,  non  ad  defectum. 
QUENSTEDT  also  sets  forth  that  God  concurs  with  respect  to 
the  entity  and  the  natural  form  of  the  actions  or  species 
naturae,  and  not  with  respect  to  their  moral  form  or  species 
moris.  God  concurs  therefore  in  the  sense  that  He  supplies 
the  power  by  which  the  action  might  have  been  good,  but 
man  misused  the  power.  HOLLAZius  says  that  God  concurs 
with  the  remote,  not  with  the  proximate  material  of  actions 
morally  evil.    The  former  is  an  indeterminate  act,  the  latter 

*  Hollazii  Exam.  Theol.  Aero.,  Ed.  V,  Part  I,  Cap.  VI,  483. 


PROVIDENCE.  119 

is  a  determinate  act  and  applied  to  a  prohibited  thing.  He 
illustrates  this  by  the  fall  of  Eve.  When  she  extended  her 
hand  to  receive  the  forbidden  fruit,  two  acts  were  present : 
1)  the  extenri  n  of  the  hand,  and  2)  the  extension  applied 
to  the  foibiJaen  fruit.  The  former  act  is  said  to  be  the 
remote  material;  the  latter,  the  proximate  material.  God 
concurred  therefore  because  He  did  not  inhibit  the  power 
of  nature,  but  He  did  not  participate  in  the  sinful  action. 
Many  other  examples  could  be  presented. 

C.    Gubernatio  or  Government. 

GUBERNATIO  IS  the  action  of  the  Triime  God  by  ivhich  He 
i?i  a  righteous,  ivise  and  loving  manner  governs  all  thbigs 
and  realizes  His  imrposed  plan.  Calovius  defines  as  fol- 
lows:* "Government  is  the  action  of  the  divine  Providence, 
by  which  God  in  the  best  way  arranges,  limits  and  directs 
the  conditions  and  actions  of  His  creatures  in  accordance 
with  His  own  wisdom,  justice  and  goodness  to  the  glory  of 
His  name  and  the  welfare  of  men." 

Government  implies  that  God  rules  in  creation  so  that 
He  is  not  an  indifferent  onlooker  or  that  He  is  passive.  He 
directs  all  and  governs  all  things,  both  the  small  and  the 
great.  He  is  King  not  only  in  the  invisible,  but  also  in  the 
visible  world.  History,  both  that  of  the  world  and  of  the 
Church,  the  general  and  the  particular,  has  a  spiritual  back- 
ground. Inasmuch  as  the  divine  government  has  especial 
reference  to  the  rational  creatures  and  man  in  the  first 
place,  who  is  the  crown  of  creation,  therefore  we  cannot 
understand  the  government  of  God  without  taking  into 
consideration  the  factor  of  freedom.  But  even  if  we  could 
take  all  the  factors  into  consideration,  we  should  still  be 
unable  to  solve  the  problem  of  the  divine  government,  be- 
cause we  lack  the  higher  understanding  and  the  necessary 
breadth  of  view. 

Many  attempts  have  been  made  to  vindicate  the  govern- 

*  Calovius:  "Gubernatio  est  actus  divinse  providentise,  quo  Deus 
optime  res  et  actiones  creaturarum  ordinat,  moderatur  et  ad  fines  suos 
dirigit  secundum  sapientiam,  justitiam  et  bonitatem  suam  ad  nominis 
sui  gloriam  et  hominis  salutem. 


120  TIIKOLOCY. 

ment  of  God  with  reference  to  His  wisdom  and  goodness 
by  reason  of  the  existence  of  evil  and  the  discordant  and 
inexplicable  contrasts  in  life.  Theodicy  is  the  scientific 
term  applied  to  such  theories  as  attempt  the  justification 
of  the  government  of  God,  a  term  that  was  originated  and 
used  by  Leibnitz.  Portions  of  the  Bible  contain  such  the- 
odicies,  as  the  Book  of  Job,  Ps.  37  and  Romans  9 — 11.  Some 
of  the  scientific  attempts  also  have  a  certain  value.  But 
we  can  be  absolutely  certain  that  the  righteous  God  shall 
finally  prove  that  He  was  both  loving  and  just. 

Among  Scripture  passages  the  following  may  be  noted : 
"He  will  judge  the  world  in  righteousness,  he  will  minister 
judgment  to  the  peoples  in  righteousness"  (Ps.  9:8);  "Thou 
wilt  judge  the  peoples  with  equity,  and  govern  the  nations 
upon  earth"  (Ps.  67:  4).  Cf.  Ps.  91.  "For  he  must  reign, 
till  he  hath  put  all  his  enemies  under  his  feet"  (1  Cor.  15: 
25)  ;  "Righteous  and  true  are  thy  ways,  thou  King  of  the 
ages"  (Rev.  15:  3). 

Gubernatio  is  divided  into :  permissio,  impeditio,  directio 
and  determmatio. 

a.  Permissio.  Quenstedt  defines:*  "Permission  is  an 
act  of  governing  Providence,  by  ivhich  God  does  not  employ 
hindrances  which  no  finite  agent  can  overcome,  in  order  to 
restrain  ratioyial  creatures,  inclining  of  their  oivn  accord  to 
sin,  f7'om  an  evil  forbidden  by  the  laiv,  but  for  just  reasons 
permits  them  to  rush  into  sins."  Concerning  permissio 
HOLLAZIUS  sets  forth  that  it  does  not  imply:  1)  kind  in- 
dulgence on  the  part  of  God,  2)   a  mitigation  of  the  law, 

3)  weakness  in  God  as  to  His  emotions,  intellect  or  power, 

4)  indifference.  It  is  a  negative  act.  God  does  not  will 
that  which  He  permits. 

We  quote  the  following  passages:  "But  my  people  heark- 
ened not  to  my  voice;  and  Israel  would  none  of  me"  (Ps. 
81:  12)  ;  "Wherefore  God  gave  them  up  in  the  lusts,"  etc. 
(Rom.  1:  24—28). 

*  QrK.NSTKirr:  "Permissio  est  actus  providentiae  gubernatricis.  quo 
Deus  creaturas  rationales  ad  peccanduni  sua  sponte  sese  inclinantes 
per  impedimenta,  quibus  agens  finitum  resistere  nequit,  vel  quibus  non 
resisturum  novit,  a  malo  lege  vetito  non  retrahit,  sed  justis  de  causis 
in  peccata  ruere  sinit." 


PUOVIDENCE.  121 

b.  Impeditio.  Quenstedt  defines:*  "Hindrance  is  an  act 
of  governing  providence,  by  ivhich  God  limits  the  action  of 
creatures  accordiyig  to  His  judgment,  so  that  they  do  not 
pi'oduce  the  result  luhich  otherivise  they  ivoidd  effect,  either 
by  a  natural  or  a  free  power  to  act." 

Biblical  examples:  Abimelech,  Gen.  20:  6;  Laban,  Gen. 
31:  24;  Balaam,  Num.  22:  12. 

c.  Directio.  Quenstedt  defines  :t  ''Direction  is  an  act 
of  governing  Providence,  by  which  God  so  regidates  the  good 
actions  of  creatures,  that  they  tend  and  are  led  to  the  object 
intended  by  God,  but  directs  the  evil  actions  to  a  certain  end 
prescribed  by  Himself,  yet  not  considered  by  those  who  sin, 
and  frequently  contrary  to  their  intention." 

Among  the  Scripture  passages  that  illustrate  this  point 
we  quote :  "Ye  meant  evil  against  me ;  but  God  meant  it  for 
good"  (Gen.  50:  20)  ;  "But  Jehovah  said  unto  Samuel,  Look 
not  on  his  countenance,  or  on  the  height  of  his  stature ;  be- 
cause I  have  rejected  him:  for  Jehovah  seeth  not  as  man 
seeth ;  for  man  looketh  on  the  outward  appearance,  but 
Jehovah  looketh  on  the  heart"  (1  Sam.  16:  7)  ;  "To  do  what- 
soever thy  hand  and  thy  counsel  foreordained  to  come  to 
pass"  (Acts  4:  28)  ;  "We  know  that  to  them  that  love  God 
all  things  work  together  for  good,  even  to  them  that  are 
called  according  to  his  purpose"  (Rom.  8:  28). 

d.  Determinatio.  Quenstedt  defines :  J  "Determination 
is  an  act  of  goverriing  Providence,  by  which  God  has  ap- 
pointed to  the  stre7igth,  actions,  and  sufferings  of  creatures 
certain  limits  within  which  they  are  restrained,  with  respect 
both  to  tim.e  and  to  greatness  and  degree." 

*  Quenstedt:  "Impeditio  est  actus  providentise  gubernatricis,  quo 
Deus  actionem  creaturarum  pro  arbitrio  suo  constringit,  ne  effectum 
dent,  quod  vel  naturali  vel  libera  agendi  vi  alias  efflcerent." 

t  Qi'enstedt:  "Directio  est  actus  providentiee  gubernatricis,  quo 
Deus  creaturarum  actiones  bonas  ita  moderatur,  ut  tendant  et  feran- 
tur  in  objectum  a  Deo  intentum,  actiones  vero  malas  ad  certum  finem 
a  se  prffistitum,  sed  a  peccantibus  non  spectatum  et  saepe  ipsorum 
intentioni  contrarium  dirigit." 

$  QuENSTEixr:  "Determinatio  est  actum  providentiae  gubernatricis  quo 
Deus  creaturarum  viribus,  actionibus  et  passionibus  certos  terminos, 
intra  quos  se  contineant,  tum  ratione  temporis,  tum  ratione  magni- 
tudinis  et  gradus  constituit." 


122  TIIKOI,0(iY. 

The  following  Scripture  passages  may  be  quoted:  "Jeho- 
vah said  unto  Satan,  Behold,  all  that  he  hath  is  in  thy  power; 
only  upon  himself  put  not  forth  thy  hand"  (Job  1 :  12)  ; 
"Let  not  the  rebellious  exalt  themselves"  (Ps.  66:  7).  Cf. 
Job  38:  11  and  Jer.  5:  22. 

4.     THE  OBJECTS  OF  PROVIDENCE. 

Finis  providenti^  is  divided  into:  1)  finis  intermedins 
or  proxhnits,  which  is  the  welfare  of  the  children  of  men, 
and  especially  the  godly;  2)  finis  primariiis  or  idtimus, which 
is  the  glory  of  the  divine  power,  wisdom  and  goodness. 

II.    Providentia  Extraordinaria  or  Immediata. 
1.    the  conception  of  miracles. 

LUTHARDT  defines:*  "The  miracle  is  the  act  of  the  imme- 
diate divine  activity  in  intervening  in  the  life  of  the  world, 
which  is  possible  by  reason  of  the  freedom  of  God,  and 
which  became  necessary  and  real  in  the  history  of  salva- 
tion." We  may  say  that  the  miracle  consists  of  two  ele- 
ments: a)  the  negative,  or  that  the  miracle  cannot  be  ex- 
plained by  the  powers  of  nature,  b)  the  positive,  or  that  the 
miracle  must  be  referred  to  the  immediate  activity  of  God 
in  revelation.  The  old  Scholastics  accepted  an  antecedent 
and  a  consequent  in  relation  to  the  miracle,  viz.,  miraculum 
suspensionis  legum  naturae  and  miraculum  restitionis  legum 
naturae.  However,  it  is  not  necessary  so  to  conceive  of  the 
matter,  for  God  is  Lord  of  nature's  laws. 

Concerning  miracles  or  the  direct  intervention  of  God 
it  may  be  remarked  that  we  are  not  familiar  with  all  the 
laws  of  nature,  and  even  if  in  every  case  these  laws  are 
counteracted  by  the  miracle,  still  they  are  not  thereby  abro- 
gated. They  are  no  more  abrogated  than  the  laws  of  gravi- 
tation are  abrogated  when  the  arm  is  lifted.  The  harmony 
of  nature  is  not  destroyed  in  the  miracle,  rather  the  divine 
life  which  is  the  foundation  of  and  manifests  itself  in  the 
harmony  of  nature  thereby  reveals  its  activity. 

*  Luthardt,  Dogmatics,  §35,  page  141. 


PROVIDENCE.  123 

We  would  point  out  three  Biblical  expressions  that  are 
used  for  miracles.  They  are :  ripa'i  or  the  miracle  as  causing 
astonishment,  indicating  its  effect  upon  the  onlooker ;  8wa/Ais 
or  the  miracle  as  revealing  the  divine  or  supernatural  power 
and  effect;  0-77/xeroi/  or  the  miracle  as  a  sign  with  the  end  in 
view  of  testifying  to  a  divine  revelation. 


2.     THE  POSSIBILITY  OF  MIRACLES. 

The  discussion  of  this  subject  belongs,  strictly,  to  Apolo- 
getics, but  a  few  remarks  may  here  be  appended.  Objec- 
tions to  the  miracles  have  been  made  by 'the  Deists  and  the 
Pantheists.  The  former  declare  that  God  cannot  intervene 
in  nature  because  He  has  subjected  the  world  to  the  rule 
of  the  laws  of  nature.  The  negative  aspect  of  the  miracles 
destroys  the  continuity  of  the  present  world  order,  while 
the  positive  aspect  establishes  a  new  order.  —  This  concep- 
tion deprives  God  of  His  freedom,  forgetting  that  God  works 
by  and  through  Himself.  The  continuity  of  the  world  order 
is  not  destroyed.  The  Pantheists  declare  that  God  and  Na- 
ture are  one.  The  laws  of  Nature  are  therefore  identical 
with  the  will  of  God.  God  would  not  interfere  with  His 
own  laws.  It  would  be  unworthy  of  a  god  to  improve  upon 
his  own  work.  It  is  the  ignorance  of  man  that  speaks  of 
miracles.  The  belief  in  miracles  is  to  a  certain  extent  de- 
pendent upon  a  misinterpretation  of  the  Hebrew  mode  of 
expression,  which  referred  everything  to  the  primary  cause. 
—  Inasmuch  as  Pantheism  does  not  accept  the  belief  in  a 
personal  God,  therefore  the  objections  that  it  raises  can  be 
met  by  Theism  and  the  proofs  of  a  supernatural  revelation. 

Hegelianism,  v/hile  not  acknowledging  the  possibility  of 
miracles,  has  a  method  of  presenting  the  matter  which  can 
be  turned  into  a  proof  for  miracles  by  transforming  the 
expressions  of  that  philosophy  into  Christian  form.  RoSEN- 
KRANTZ  says:  'The  miracle  is  the  determination  of  nature 
through  the  spirit,  so  that  nature  cannot  withstand  the  will 
of  the  spirit.  The  ground  of  nature  is  not  in  itself;  its 
principle  is  the  spirit,  for  which  reason  nature  possesses 


124  Tiii:oi,()(iY. 

no  power  to  set  limitations  for  the  spirit.  This  power  of 
the  spirit  was  fully  concentrated  in  Christ."  But  Strauss 
objects  in  the  interest  of  Pantheism :  "To  be  sure  the  spirit 
possesses  power  over  nature,  but  not  the  spirit  that  takes 
notions  to  fly,  or  walk  upon  the  water,  or  change  water  into 
wine,  but  the  spirit  that  works  quietly  as  law  and  formative 
power  in  nature,  and  which  in  man  by  strenuous  effort 
through  intellect  and  will  works  itself  up  to  a  position  of 
lordship  over  nature."  However,  we  must  not  forget  what 
Pantheism  means  by  spirit.  It  is  not  a  spirit  separated 
from  the  world,  but  rather  the  world  spirit  which  finds 
itself  in  man. 

3.     THE  TRUTH  OF  MIRACLES. — THEIR  DIVISION. 

This  truth  is  set  forth  clearly  in  the  divine-human  nature 
of  our  Lord  and  in  His  resurrection.  The  historical  per- 
sonality of  Jesus  Christ  cannot  be  denied.  His  divinity  and 
resurrection  can  be  so  clearly  and  convincingly  demon- 
strated that  no  doubt  need  be  entertained.  The  historical 
proofs  of  the  truth  of  the  miracles  are  overwhelming.  The 
proofs  of  the  testimony  of  Christ  Himself  and  of  the  Apos- 
tles possess  great  value,  especially  when  we  consider  care- 
fully the  character  of  these  persons.  To  every  Christian 
the  miracles  are  true  by  reason  of  his  own  regeneration. 
Regeneration  is  in  itself  a  miracle. 

The  miracles  are  divided  as  follows:  a)  Miracula  naturx 
et  potentise  or  miracles  in  the  ordinary  sense;  b)  Miracula 
pvcvscientise  or  the  prophecies  and  their  wonderful  fulfil- 
ment; c)  Miracula  gratise  or  miracles  in  the  kingdom  of 
grace,  which  Luther  considered  the  most  important. 

4.  THE  OBJECT  OF  THE  MIRACLES. 

The  miracles  belong  to  the  history  of  revelation  and  served 
to  set  the  seal  of  approval  upon  the  messengers  of  God,  the 
Lord  Jesus  Christ  and  the  Apostles,  as  also  to  establish  the 
divine  origin  of  the  Church.  For  this  reason  no  miracles 
are  necessary  during  the  period  of  the  Church's  activity. 


riioviDEXCE.  125 

But  the  Church  itself  is  a  constant  miracle,  and  in  the  latter 
days  miracles  will  occur  again, 

5.     NOTES  ON  THE  HISTORY  OF  DOGMA. 

The  doctrine  of  Providence  has  always  occupied  a  promi- 
nent place  in  the  Christian  Church,  although  in  the  begin- 
ning it  was  treated  more  from  the  apologetic  than  the 
dogmatic  standpoint.  The  oldest  Church  Fathers  defended 
the  doctrine  of  Providence  against  Stoicism  and  Agnosticism 
on  the  one  hand  and  epicurean  Deism  on  the  other.  In  the 
discussion  great  weight  was  laid  on  the  question  of  purpose. 
During  the  Polemical  period  several  works  on  Providence 
appeared,  which  aimed  at  a  clearer  definition  of  the  subject. 
Julius  Africanus  spoke  of  a  general  and  a  special  Provi- 
dence. In  relation  to  providentia  extraordinaria,  Augustine 
was  the  first  to  define  more  clearly  the  concept  of  Provi- 
dence. During  the  Middle  Ages  it  was  taught  that  the 
presence  of  God  in  the  world  was  an  adessentia  ad  crea- 
turas  substantialis  which  was  termed  immediatio  suppositi 
and  immediatio  virtutis.  Thomas  Aquinas  gave  more  def- 
inite form  to  the  concept  of  the  miracle  and  distinguished 
between  the  miracles  as  ordinary  and  relative,  which 
Augustine  did  not.  The  Reformers  did  not  speculate  con- 
cerning Providence.  The  dogmatic  formulation  of  the  doc- 
trine was  accomplished  by  the  old  Lutheran  Dogmaticians. 
Pantheism  and  Deism  endeavored  to  refute  the  doctrine  of 
Providence,  while  the  theory  of  Occasionalism  arose  through 
the  philosophy  of  Descartes.  Leibnitz  explained  the  miracle 
on  the  theory  of  pre-established  harmony.  Since  then  many 
controversies  have  arisen  concerning  Providence  and  the 
miracles  by  reason  especially  of  the  attacks  of  modern  Ma- 
terialism, but  there  has  been  no  particular  development  of 
the  dogma. 

JusTix  Martyr  based  his  view  of  the  Providence  of  God  on  the  order 
that  he  found  everywhere  prevalent  in  nature.  God  ruled  the  whole, 
while  the  details  were  entrusted  to  the  angels.  Clement  of  Alexandria 
was  the  first  to  distinguish  between  the  will  of  God  as  positively  active 
and  as  permissive,  the  latter  in  relation  to  the  evil.     He  also  taught 


126  TIIF-OLOGY. 

a  concursus  divinus.  Tkhtii.i.ian  said  that  physical  evil  or  malum 
pcen.T  was  the  punishment  for  the  moral  evil  or  malum  culpsp.  Cyi'hian 
taught  that  the  cause  of  evil  was  the  age  of  the  world.  Ohkjk.n  con- 
sidered that  God  employed  the  physical  evil  as  a  means  for  the  im- 
provement of  man.  Concerning  miracles  Origen  said  that  they  proved 
the  truth  of  the  teachings  of  Christ,  while  he  also  stated  that  the  moral 
effects  of  Christianity  were  greater  works  than  the  ordinary  miracles. 

Lactaxtius  attempted  to  defend  God  on  the  ground  of  the  ex- 
istence of  evil.  He  maintained  that  good  must  have  its  opposite  in 
evil,  but  God  could  not  Himself  create  evil.  For  this  reason  two 
beings  were  created,  one  the  Son,  the  right  hand  of  God,  the  other 
Satan,  the  left  hand,  who  is  the  cause  of  all  evil.  At^gi-stixe  taught 
that  God  has  not  forsaken  the  world  which  He  created,  but  continues 
His  unceasing  activity  through  preservation.  He  did  not  consider 
miracles  in  a  narrow  sense  but  included  miracles  in  general.  The 
miracles  conflict  with  the  laws  of  nature  as  far  as  we  know  them.  He 
placed  great  value  upon  all  miracles,  yet  held  spiritual  miracles  the 
greatest.  John  ok  Dama.scus  set  forth  that  the  voluntas  antecedens  of 
God  was  directed  toward  the  good,  and  that  the  voluntas  consequens 
permitted  the  evil. 

THo.xfAS  Aquinas  called  Providence  creatio  continuata.  As  the  pri- 
mary cause  God  exerts  influence  upon  the  secondary  causes  in  a  pecu- 
liar manner.  He  considered  that  evil  was  necessary  for  the  perfection 
of  the  whole. 

Leibnitz  says  that  evil  is  partly  metaphysical,  the  imperfection  of 
the  finite,  which  evil  is  willed  directly,  partly  physical  and  moral, 
which  God  indirectly  wills.  Physical  evil  is  a  means  and  moral  evil 
a  condition  without  which  that  which  is  best  cannot  be  attained.  He 
explained  miracles  by  the  theory  of  pre-established  harmony,  which 
implies  that  God  has  set  certain  limitations  in  the  ordinary  processes 
of  nature,  which  occur  at  predetermined  times. 

Kaxt  declared  that  theoretically  it  is  impossible  to  prove  or  deny 
the  possibility  of  miracles  but  held  the  doctrine  of  miracles  pernicious 
inasmuch  as  it  sets  forth  improper  moral  motives.  Sciileiekmaciier 
'speaks  of  the  absolute  causality  of  God  and  includes  both  creation  and 
providence  under  the  head  of  preservation.  Confessional  theology  has 
retained  the  old  dogmatic  definitions  and  terms,  while  rejecting  such 
explanations  of  the  miracles  as  the  theory  of  pre-established  harmony. 


no.    THE  ANGELS. 

The  word  angel,  meaning  messenger,  occurs  in  the  Word 
of  God  in  at  least  a  threefold  significance.  Used  in  the 
broadest  sense  the  word  angel  may  apply  to  the  powers  of 
nature  and  natural  phenomena.     "Who  maketh  winds  his 


'  THE   ANGELS.  127 

messengers:  Flames  of  fire  his  ministers"  (Ps.  104:  4).  In 
a  broad  sense  it  may  apply  to  human  beings,  such  as  priests, 
prophets  and  pastors.  In  the  narrow  sense,  however,  the 
word  angel  has  reference  to  those  personal  spirits  who  are 
specifically  called  angels. 

Angels  are  finite,  incorporeal  beings,  endowed  ivith  per- 
sonal form  and  attributes,  and  a  high  order  of  intelligence, 
created  to  serve  God  and  glorify  Him. 

Like  the  world  and  all  living  creatures  the  angels  were 
created  before  man.  Cf.  Job  38 :  7.  They  were  not  created 
before  the  original  substance  of  the  world,  for  only  God 
existed  before  the  foundation  of  the  world.  They  were 
created  in  connection  with  the  creation  of  the  world.  "Who 
laid  the  corner-stone  thereof,  when  the  morning  stars  sang 
together,  and  the  sons  of  God  shouted  for  joy?"  Compare 
Col.  1 :  16  for  an  account  of  their  creation.  Of  their  ex- 
istence as  real  beings  and  not  personifications  we  are  abso- 
lutely certain  on  the  basis  of  the  Word  of  God. 

However,  attempts  have  been  made  to  prove  that  angels 
exist.  Among  such  attempts  may  be  mentioned  that  of 
GODET.  He  says:*  "We  know  of  three  kinds  of  living  be- 
ings :  plants,  animals  and  man.  Our  thought  requires  a 
fourth  series.  Among  plants  there  exists  only  the  species, 
for  which  reason  we  speak  of  specimens.  Among  the  ani- 
mals the  species  are  indeed  essential,  but  the  individual 
appears.  The  animals  are  governed  by  instinct.  The  in- 
dividual lives  but  as  if  bound  by  the  fetters  of  the  species. 
In  man  the  species  is  found  because  we  speak  of  the  human 
race.  Instinct  is  found,  but  it  is  not  dominant.  Man  bursts 
open  the  prison  doors  of  species  and  instinct,  because  he 
is  a  distinct  person.  Should  there  not  be  found  a  fourth 
series  of  living  beings  to  complete  the  system?  In  a 
mathematical  proportion  the  fourth  term  can  be  ascer- 
tained when  the  three  are  known.  May  it  not  be  that  the 
angels  must  be  the  living  beings  that  complete  the  system 
of  creation?" 

The  original  estate  of  the  angels  is  described  as  habitus 

*  Godet,  Bibl.  Studier,  pp.  2—4, 


128  I  iiioi.ocv. 

concreatus  bonus.  They  possessed  a  propensio  ad  bonum. 
Their  justitia  or  righteousness  was  perfecta,  but  amissibilis. 
They  possessed  freedom  of  choice,  the  form  in  which  created 
freedom  is  reaHzed.  The  concept  of  freedom  implies  self- 
determination  and  an  ultimately  determinate  will.  In  God 
these  elements  are  eternally  and  indissolubly  united,  because 
God  is  absolutely  free,  but  in  the  creatures  freedom  must 
be  realized.  Many  of  the  angels  used  their  freedom  of 
choice  in  a  right  manner  and  remained  good ;  others  abused 
this  freedom  and  became  evil. 

I.    The  Good  Angels. 

The  good  angels  are  those  who  remained  in  their  originl 
goodness,  righteousness  and  holiness,  in  which  estate  God 
confirmed  them  as  a  reward  for  their  obedience,  wherefore 
they  can  no  more  fall  into  sin.  From  status  gratise  they 
entered  forever  into  status  glorise.  In  this  manner  all  their 
good  attributes  were  confirmed  and  increased. 

1.     THEIR  ATTRIBUTES. 

The  following  attributes  are  ascribed  to  the  good  angels: 

1)  spiritualitas  or  spirituality.  Angels  are  called  spiritus 
completi,  because  they  have  no  need  of  ordinary  bodies,  al- 
though they  have  form.    Men  are  called  spiritus  incompleti ; 

2)  invisibilitcis  or  invisibility,  that  is,  they  are  ordinarily 
invisible  to  us;  3)i7iclivisibilitas  or  indivisibility;  4)  immu- 
tabilitafi  relativa  or  relative  immutability.  This  includes 
also  incorruptibilitas  ab  intra  et  ab  extra;  5)  immortalitas 
relativa  or  relative  immortality  in  contradistinction  to  God, 
who  is  immortal  in  the  absolute  sense;  6)  xternitas  relativa 
or  relative  eternity.  The  word  sevum  is  also  used  for  this 
attribute,  which  implies  an  intermediate  state  which  is 
neither  aeternitas  or  tempus;  7)  iUocalitas,  i.  e.,  they  are 
not  present  anywhere  in  ubi  circumscriptive,  because  they 
do  not  have  material  bodies,  which  are  defined  by  limits; 
8)  nbeitas  definitiva,  i.  e.,  they  are  somewhere  and  not 
everywhere  present.     Their  substance  at  a  given  moment 


THE    ANGELS.  129 

is  definitely  somewhere,  which  Dogmaticians  express  with 
TTou  or  ubi,  for  which  reason  it  is  said  of  the  angels  that 
they  are  in  ubi  definitive;  9)  agilitas  or  that  they  move  with 
great  celerity,  which  nevertheless,  according  to  human  cal- 
culations, requires  time,  inasmuch  as  they  are  finite  beings, 
unable  instantaneously  to  traverse  the  universe.  Cf.  Dan. 
9:  23;  10:  12 — 14;  10)  boriitas  or  goodness;  11)  cognitio 
iiaturalis,  relativa  et  beatifica,  inasmuch  as  they  possess 
great  knowledge,  but  are  not  omniscient.  They  know  God  a 
posteriori  and  also  the  thoughts  of  man  a  posteriori.  Their 
knowledge  is  great  by  reason  of  their  natural  gifts,  but  they 
grow  in  knowledge  mediated  through  revelation.  As  con- 
firmed in  the  good  their  knowledge  is  also  blessed;  12)  po- 
tentia  magna,  sed  limitata  ac  finita,  because  their  power  is 
great,  but  they  are  not  almighty;  13)  libertas  voluntatis  or 
the  freedom  of  the  will. 

We  would  call  attention  to  the  following  passages :  "Thou- 
sands of  thousands  ministered  unto  him,  and  ten  thousand 
times  ten  thousand  stood  before  him"  (Dan.  7  :  10)  ;"  Twelve 
legions  of  angels"  (Matt.  26:  53)  ;  "Things  invisible, 
whether  thrones,"  etc.  (Col.  1:  16)  ;  "For  neither  can  they 
die  any  more:  for  they  are  equal  to  the  angels"  (Luke  20: 
36)  ;  "All  the  holy  angels"  (Matt.  25:  31)  ;  "The  elect  an- 
gels" (1  Tim.  5:  21)  ;  "According  to  the  wisdom  of  an  angel 
of  God"  (2  Sam.  14:  20)  ;  "Knoweth  no  one,  not  even  the 
angels  in  heaven"  (Mark  13:  32)  ;  "Which  things  angels 
desire  to  look  into"  (1  Peter  1:  12)  ;  "Angels,  mighty  in 
strength"  (Ps.  103:  20)  ;  "The  angel  of  Jehovah  went  forth, 
and  smote  in  the  camp  of  the  Assyrians  a  hundred  four- 
score and  five  thousand"  (2  Kings  19:  35)  ;  "The  prince  of 
the  kingdom  of  Persia  withstood  me  one  and  twenty  days : 
but,  lo,  Michael,  one  of  the  chief  princes,  came  to  help  me" 
(Dan.  10:  13). 

2.     THEIR  ABODE  AND  DEGREES. 

Although  we  do  not  know  for  certain,  still  it  may  not  be 
considered  altogether  illusory  to  assume  that  the  abode  of 
the  angels  is  to  be  found  in  the  shining  world  of  the  starry 


130  '  THKOI.OGY. 

universe.  Compare  Job  38 :  7.  However,  this  passage  can- 
not be  considered  conclusive  proof,  inasmuch  as  the  stars 
did  not  appear  before  the  fourth  day.  Still  it  is  not  impos- 
sible that  angels  inhabit  the  universe  of  the  stars.  We  do 
know  that  their  special  abode  is  in  heaven,  and  in  the  heav- 
enly places  (Eph.  3:  10),  although  they  are  also  on  earth, 
where  as  ministers  of  the  Lord  they  do  His  pleasure.  In 
Matthew  18:  10  we  read:  "Their  angels  do  always  behold 
the  face  of  my  Father  who  is  in  heaven." 

In  reference  to  a  spiritual  world  and  abode  of  angels 
reason  endorses  what  analogy  suggests,  that  there  is  not 
only  a  world  of  spirits,  but  there  must  also  be  starry  worlds 
suitable  for  homes,  where  these  rational  spiritual  beings 
dwell.     When    we    know    from    revelation    the    countless 
ascending  orders  of  angelic  beings  and  we  see  the  innu- 
merable  stars   it  is  very   reasonable  to   hold  the  opinion 
that  the  great  universe  of  solar  systems  and  stellar  worlds 
are  inhabited  by  angels.     Many  students  of  the  Bible  and 
also  scientists  claim  that  the  all-wise  Creator  would  not 
have  created  such  a  vast  universe  to  be  an  empty  void.    And 
it  is  very  clear  that  human  beings  do  not  inhabit  the  other 
planets  or  stars.     Human  beings  are  found  only  on  earth, 
in  Hades  and  in  Paradise.     It  is  a  mystery  why  God  pre- 
pared this  comparatively  small  globe  as  a  habitation  for 
humanity,  but  it  is  sufficiently  large,  when  we  consider  that 
our  abode  here,  if  we  are  God's  children,  serves  as  a  school 
to  prepare  the  heavenly  citizens  for  the  eternal  life-work  in 
the  world  to  come.    It  is,  therefore,  reasonable  to  think  that 
the  habitable  planets  and  stars  in  the  great  universe  are 
inhabited  by  orders  of  angels.    We  must  not  forget  that  the 
angelic  hosts  are  of  many  kinds,  such  as  thrones,  dominions, 
principalities  and  powers.    Lucifer,  so  called,  had  his  prin- 
cipality before  he  fell.     Order  reigns  in  the  kingdom  of 
God.    There  may  be  angelic  orders  who  have  no  direct  rela- 
tion to  this  earth,  but  still  have  the  greatest  interest  in  what 
takes  place  here.    Eph.  3 :  10.    Notice  also  in  the  same  verse 
"heavenly  places."     In  the  angelic  worlds  distances  do  not 
prevent    communication.     Compare    Dan.  9 :  21.     In    this 


THE    ANGELS.  131 

verse  we  find  the  expression,  "being  caused  to  fly  swiftly." 
But  countless  numbers  of  angels  minister  to  the  Church, 
just  as  Gabriel  ministered  to  Daniel  and  to  Mary  at  the  time 
of  the  incarnation  of  the  Son  of  God.  And  we  may  be  sure 
that  Gabriel  ministers  continually  in  the  kingdom  of  God. 
Without  seeing  these  angels  we  stand  in  near  relation  to 
them.    Compare  Heb,  12 :  22. 

There  is  rank  in  the  angelic  world.  Equality  is  found 
neither  among  the  angels  in  heaven  nor  among  men  on 
earth,  yet  in  heaven  superiority  causes  no  envy,  the  angels 
being  holy  and  governed  entirely  by  God's  will.  The  Bible 
speaks  of  archangels.  Among  these  are  mentioned  Michael 
and  Gabriel.  Michael  means:  Who  is  like  God?  Although 
elevated  to  such  a  lofty  eminence,  he  is  nevertheless  the 
humblest  in  spirit  and  knows  full  well  the  immeasurable 
distance  that  separates  him  from  the  Creator.  Gabriel 
means :  Hero  of  God.  He  made  known  to  Daniel  the  deliv- 
erance of  Judah  out  of  the  Babylonian  captivity.  He  is  the 
heavenly  evangelist  who  revealed  to  Mary  that  she  would 
give  birth  to  the  Saviour  of  the  world,  Paul  speaks  of 
thrones,  dominions,  principalities  and  powers.  We  read  of 
cherubim  and  seraphim.  The  occupation  of  the  angels 
seems  also  to  be  graded.  In  Daniel  we  read  of  "one  of  the 
chief  princes."  In  Zechariah  we  find  mentioned  the  "angel 
of  the  Lord,"  also  a  leader  of  a  group  who  brings  reports  to 
the  angel  of  the  Lord,  and  also  an  interpreter. 

3.      THE   OCCUPATION   OF  THE   ANGELS  AND   THEIR  RELATION 

TO  MEN. 

The  angels  praise  and  serve  the  Lord,  Angels  were  pres- 
ent at  most  of  the  acts  of  creation,  revealed  themselves  to 
the  Patriarchs,  were  present  at  the  giving  of  the  Law,  de- 
fended Israel,  punished  the  enemies,  etc.  They  were  present 
at  the  birth  of  the  Lord  Jesus  and  at  various  other  times 
during  the  life  of  Christ.  We  also  find  that  they  assisted 
individual  persons,  and  on  the  last  day  they  will  participate 
in  the  judgment.  It  lies  in  the  nature  of  the  case  that  the 
angels  are  not  unoccupied.     In  most  cases  God  acts  indi- 


132  riiKoi.cxiY. 

rectly.  On  the  earth  He  uses  human  means,  but  back  of  the 
visible  world  lies  the  spiritual  background.  In  reading 
Daniel  and  Zechariah  we  find  this  truth  set  forth  in  a  living 
and  realistic  way.  P^urthermore,  the  Word  of  God  tells  us 
that  the  angels  are  active  not  only  in  heaven,  but  also  on 
earth,  in  the  family  and  in  the  Church.  For  this  reason 
Dogmaticians  speak  of  status  oecoiiomicus,  ecclesiasticus 
and  jjoliticus,  in  which  the  angels  are  active. 

Concerning  the  activity  of  the  angels  in  status  oeconomi- 
cus  the  following  examples  and  passages  may  be  cited :  The 
visit  of  angels  to  Abraham  and  Lot  (Gen.  18,  19)  ;  the  an- 
gels of  God  met  Jacob  and  he  called  the  place  Mahanaim; 
"The  angel  of  Jehovah  encampeth  round  about  them  that 
fear  him"  (Ps.  34:  7)  ;  "He  will  give  his  angels  charge  over 
thee,  to  keep  thee  in  all  thy  ways"  (Ps.  91 :  11)  ;  "God  hath 
sent  his  angel,  and  hath  shut  the  lions'  mouths"  (Dan.  6: 
22)  ;  an  angel  of  the  Lord  revealed  himself  to  Joseph  in  a 
dream ;  cf .  Matt.  2  :  13 ;  Lazarus  was  carried  by  angels  into 
Abraham's  bosom;  cf.  Luke  16:  22;  an  angel  came  to  Cor- 
nelius; cf.  Acts  10:  3;  the  angel  of  the  Lord  liberated  Peter 
out  of  prison;  cf.  Acts  12:  7 — 11 ;  "Ministering  spirits,  sent 
forth  to  do  service  for  the  sake  of  them  that  shall  inherit 
salvation"  (Heb.  1 :  14)  ;  "Entertained  angels"  (Heb.  13:  2). 

As  examples  of  their  co-operation  in  status  ecclesiasticus 
the  following  may  be  observed :  The  Law  ordained  through 
angels  by  the  hand  of  a  mediator  (Gal.  3:  19)  ;  Gabriel 
made  known  to  Mary  that  she  would  give  birth  to  Christ 
(Luke  1 :  26)  ;  the  appearance  of  the  angels  to  the  shepherds 
(Luke  2:  9 — 13)  ;  the  revelation  of  the  angel  to  Paul  (Acts 
27:  23)  ;  "For  this  cause  ought  the  woman  to  have  a  sign 
of  authority  on  her  head,  because  of  the  angels"  (1  Cor.  11 : 
10)  ;  "To  the  intent  that  now  unto  the  principalities  and 
the  powers  in  the  heavenly  places  might  be  made  known 
through  the  church  the  manifold  wisdom  of  God"  (Eph.  3: 
10)  ;  I  charge  thee  in  the  sight  of  God,  and  Christ  Jesus, 
and  the  elect  angels"  (1  Tim  5:  21)  ;  "Compassed  about 
with  so  great  a  cloud  of  witnesses"  (Heb.  12:  1)  ;  "I  am 
a  fellow-servant  with  thee"  (Rev.  19:  10). 


THE  ANGELS.  133 

The  following  Bible  passages  may  be  cited  to  set  forth 
their  activity  in  status  i)oliticus:  An  angel  slew  the  Assyr- 
ians (2  Kings  19:  35)  ;  an  angel  fights  with  the  prince  of 
Persia,  etc.  (cf.  Dan.  10)  ;  "Then  the  angel  of  Jehovah  an- 
swered and  said,  0  Jehovah  of  hosts,  how  long  wilt  thou 
not  have  mercy  on  Jerusalem  and  on  the  cities  of  Judah?" 
(Zech.  1:  12).  Compare  the  activity  of  the  angels  in  the 
last  days  in  accordance  with  Rev.  15,  16,  17,  18,  19,  etc. 

4.     THE  OBJECTS  OF  THE  ACTIVITIES  OF  THE  ANGELS. 

These  are  first  and  foremost,  finis  primarius,  that  they 
shall  glorify  God  and  serve  Him.  Finis  secimdarius  implies 
that  they  shall  serve  the  faithful.  For  this  reason  they 
come  in  the  closest  contact  with  the  true  members  of  the 
Church  of  Christ.  Although  the  redeemed  stand  closer  to 
God  than  the  angels,  the  latter  shall  nevertheless  belong  to 
the  kingdom  of  Christ.  As  Jews  and  heathens  were  united 
in  the  Church  of  Christ,  so  men  and  angels  shall  be  united 
so  as  to  form  a  common  organism  or  the  kingdom  of  God. 
In  Eph.  1 :  10  we  read :  "To  sum  up  all  things  in  Christ,  the 
things  in  the  heavens,  and  the  things  upon  the  earth." 

5.      NOTES  ON  THE  HISTORY  OF  DOGMA. 

In  the  Apostolic  Church  it  was  generally  taught  that  the 
angels  were  personal  beings  and  not  personifications,  as 
Philo  taught.  The  worship  of  angels  was  disapproved.  The 
Council  of  Laodicaea  in  363  expressed  such  disapproval. 
This  proves  that  the  worship  of  angels  took  place  at  that 
time,  viz.,  during  the  fourth  century.  Constantine  the  Great 
had  built  and  consecrated  a  church  to  Michael.  Others  did 
the  same.  In  this  manner  the  people  were  influenced  to 
worship  angels.  Gregory  the  Great  disapproved  of  the  wor- 
ship of  angels.  At  the  Council  of  Nicsea  in  787  angels  were 
accorded  what  Augustine  had  called  8ovAeta,  Dionysius  the 
Areopagite  divides  the  angels  into  three  hierarchies  with 
three  subdivisions  undei'  each.  John  of  Damascus  retained 
the  same  division.     The  Lateran  Council  in  1215  declared 


1?,4  THi;OI.(»(lY. 

that  the  angels  were  spiritual  beings  and  that  they  were 
created  good.  At  the  time  of  the  Reformation  there  was  no 
dispute  between  Catholics  and  Protestants  with  regard  to 
angels  except  as  related  to  the  subject  of  worship,  which 
the  latter  rejected.  The  Council  of  Trent  confirmed  the 
doctrine  of  the  worship  of  angels.  The  doctrine  concerning 
angels  has  not  been  the  subject  of  any  extensive  dogmatic 
development.  During  the  modern  critical  period  the  theory 
of  personification  has  been  presented  by  many,  but  the  ortho- 
dox Dogmaticians  maintain  correctly  that  angels  are  per- 
sons who  are  highly  endowed  and  serve  the  Lord  both  in 
heaven  and  on  earth. 

Justin  Maktyk  rejected  the  personification  theory  of  Philo.  He  also 
speaks  of  guardian  angels.  Orioex  said  that  the  angels  were  created 
before  the  world.  He  speaks  likewise  of  guardian  angels,  maintaining 
that  they  pray  for  us  and  instill  good  thoughts. 

Lactantius  said  that  living  spirits  proceeded  from  God;  that  one 
of  these  was  the  Son  who  emerged  from  the  mouth,  while  Satan  on 
the  other  hand  came  forth  from  the  nostrils.  Ai'gustine  taught  that 
the  angels  were  created  on  the  first  day,  for  which  reason  he  inter- 
preted the  light  in  an  allegorical  manner.  He  said  that  their  knowl- 
edge was  twofold:  1)  matutina,  because  they  viewed  objects  in  their 
original  images;  2)  vespertina,  because  they  viewed  objects  in  them- 
selves. With  regard  to  worship  Augustine  distinguished  between 
Xarpeto,  which  is  accorded  to  God,  and  SouAeju,  which  is  accorded  to 
the  angels.    John  of  Damascus  ascribed  to  the  angels  pure  spirituality. 

At  the  meeting  at  Nicaea  in  787  it  was  taught  that  the  angels  were 
possessed  of  a  refined  corporeality.  The  Lateran  Council  in  1215 
taught  that  the  angels  were  pure  spiritual  essences.  Thomas  Aquixas 
maintained  that  there  were  not  two  angels  belonging  to  the  same 
species.  He  also  said  that  more  than  one  angel  could  ijot  occupy  the 
same  point,  as  Occam  taught. 

Luthp:r  believed  that  the  angels  were  graded  and  that  there  were 
guardian  angels.  The  Confessions  concede  that  the  angels  pray  for 
us,  but  the  doctrine  of  their  adoration  and  supplication  is  rejected. 
Compare  the  Apology,  Art.  9,  which  also  speaks  of  the  supplication  of 
the  saints. 

SwEi)KMU)K(;  denies  the  existence  of  the  angels  and  declares  that 
they  are  the  spirits  of  the  glorified  dead.  Fichte  says  that  the  angels 
are  the  7rAi;pw/i.a  of  God  and  the  types  of  the  world-creation  and  the 
essence  of  tilings.  ScHLF:iERxrACHEu  declared  that  faith  in  angels  had 
arisen  through  the  imagination,  inasmuch  as  it  was  thought  that  there 
were  other  rational   creatures  besides  men.     De  Wetie  asserted  that 


THE   ANGELS.  135 

faith  ill  angels  was  based  on  pious  presentiments.  Maktexskx  speaks 
of  the  world  of  ideas,  but  he  also  declares  the  angels  to  be  personal 
beings.  Delitzscii  says  that  angels  have  rarified  pneumatic  bodies, 
while  PiiiLippi  says  that  they  are  pure  spiritual  essences. 


II.    The  Evil  Angels. 

The  evil  angels  are  those  that  failed  in  the  test  and  did 
not  therefore  remain  in  their  concreated  or  original  wisdom 
and  holiness,  but  became  the  enemies  of  God  and  men,  for 
which  reason  they  shall  be  punished  with  everlasting  tor- 
ment. 

1.     THE  EXISTENCE  OF  SATAN  AND  THE  EVIL  ANGELS. 

Satan  is  spoken  of  in  the  form  of  a  serpent  in  Gen.  3. 
Undoubtedly  he  is  also  referred  to  in  Lev.  16  under  the 
name  of  Azazel.  The  doctrine  did  not  therefore  originate 
among  the  Persians,  the  Jews  being  supposed  to  have  brought 
it  with  them  from  the  Babylonian  captivity.  Satan  is  repre- 
sented in  the  New  Testament  as  a  personality.  The  Lord's 
Prayer  may  also  be  considered  as  containing  an  argument 
for  the  personality  of  Satan,  inasmuch  as  the  expression 
Tov  TTovepov  need  not  necessarily  be  translated  in  the  abstract 
sense.  The  existence  of  evil  angels  is  clearly  taught  in  the 
Word  of  God.  Without  the  existence  of  the  evil  spirits  it 
would  be  much  harder  to  explain  man's  fall  into  sin.  Chris- 
tian experience  in  relation  to  temptation  also  presents  an 
indubitable  proof  of  the  existence  of  the  powers  of  evil. 

Among  the  theories  that  in  one  form  or  another  deny  the 
teachings  of  the  Scriptures  on  this  point  may  be  mentioned : 
a)  Dualism  as  it  is  represented  in  Hylism  and  Parseism. 
The  former  regards  matter  as  an  eternal  principle  of  evil, 
for  which  reason  the  conception  of  personality  is  elimi- 
nated. The  latter  speaks  of  a  concrete  personality  who  is 
the  creator  of  evil,  b)  The  modern  theory  of  personifica- 
tion. •  According  to  this  theory  the  evil  spirits  are  merely 
the  symbolic  expressions  of  evil  principles  and  desires. 


136  TIIKOLOGY. 

2.     THE  ORIGINAL  AND  PRESENT  CONDITION  OF  THE  EVIL 

ANGELS. 

The  original  condition  of  the  evil  angels  is  termed  status 
gratiae.  It  was  necessary  that  they  be  tried  and  tested  in 
order  that  they  might  become  self-determined.  When  they 
should  realize  this  self-determination,  which  is  the  content 
of  real  and  material  freedom,  then  the  moment  of  test  pre- 
sented itself.  In  fact  the  very  presence  of  God  as  the  Abso- 
lute demanded  a  decision.  They  had  to  decide  for  or  against 
the  Supreme  Being.  Such  a  necessity  meant  that  they  had 
to  go  through  a  trial  or  probation.  In  such  a  trial  they 
could  not  escape  a  decision  by  deliberate  volition.  If  the 
formal  freedom  or  power  of  choice  together  with  the  deter- 
minate result  should  mean  anything  as  a  test,  there  could 
not  be  a  determinism  on  the  part  of  God.  All  the  angels 
were  created  relatively  good,  but  in  order  to  be  perfectly 
good  they  must  make  a  free  choice.  God  was  not  satisfied 
to  be  surrounded  by  mere  animals ;  He  desired  rational  be- 
ings with  character.  The  finest  specimens  of  animals,  the 
most  beautiful  vegetation  and  precious  stones  as  costly  as 
Kohinoor  would  mean  nothing  to  God,  if  there  were  no 
persons  who  of  their  own  free  will  had  chosen  to  love  and 
obey  Him.  There  would  be  no  real  power  of  choice,  if 
rational  beings  could  not  decide  one  way  or  the  other.  If 
all  the  angels  had  determined  to  be  good,  there  would  be  no 
criticism  on  the  conception  of  freedom  as  implying  two 
possibilities.  The  creation  of  free  beings  meant  a  risk. 
Should  God  have  desisted  from  creating  them  on  account 
of  the  implied  risk?  Some  say  that  God  should  not  have 
created  the  angels  of  whom  He  must  have  foreseen  that 
they  would  make  a  wrong  choice.  But  God  foreknew  only 
actualities.  When  God  had  conceived  the  creation  of  angels, 
He  could  not  but  complete  their  actual  creation,  because  His 
thoughts  are  not  vain  and  empty  speculations.  Though 
almighty,  He  did  not,  for  wise  and  just  reasons,  annihilate 
the  beings  He  foreknew  would  abuse  their  freedom.  The 
angel   afterwards  called   Satan,   together   with   the   others 


THE  ANGELS.  137 

who  fell,  determined  in  the  test  of  their  own  free  will  upon 
an  existence  of  self-will  and  utter  selfishness.  In  this  way 
their  condition  was  changed  into  status  miserise,  in  which 
they  now  and  ever  shall  remain  because  their  very  essence 
is  evil.  Their  fall  occurred  before  the  creation  of  man 
and  possibly  before  the  six  days  of  creation.  The  Scriptures 
make  no  mention  of  the  time,  hence  nothing  certain  can  be 
said  about  it.  Christ  says  concerning  Satan  that  he  was 
a  murderer  frcmi  the  beginning.  Cf .  John  8 :  44.  In  1  John 
3 :  8  we  read :  "The  devil  sinneth  from  the  beginning." 
However,  this  expression  is  not  to  be  construed  to  mean 
that  the  devil  fell  immediately  after  his  creation,  but  that 
he  remained  for  some  time,  even  if  but  a  short  time,  in  his 
original  state  before  he  became  puffed  up  with  pride.  Cf. 
1  Tim.  3 :  6.  The  evil  angels  had  a  principality,  but  abused 
their  freedom  of  choice  and  of  their  own  free  will  aban- 
doned the  path  of  right.  "And  the  angels  which  kept  not 
their  own  principality,  but  left  their  proper  habitation,  he 
hath  kept  in  everlasting  bonds  under  darkness  unto  the 
judgment  of  the  great  day"  (Jude  6). 

3.     THEIR  ATTRIBUTES. 

In  part  they  have  the  same  attributes  as  the  good  angels. 
Among  these  may  be  mentioned :  spirituality,  indivisibility, 
relative  eternity,  illocality,  having  a  definite  habitation  and 
the  power  of  moving  with  great  swiftness  from  place  to 
place.  The  evil  angels  possess  great  knowledge,  although 
it  is  perverted.     Their  power  is  also  great,  though  limited. 

The  following  Scripture  passages  may  be  cited :  "Evil 
spirits"  (Luke  7:  21)  ;  "The  spiritual  hosts  of  wickedness" 
(Eph.  6:  12)  ;  "What  have  I  to  do  with  thee,  Jesus,  thou 
Son  of  the  Most  High  God?"  (Mark  5:7);  "The  demons 
also  believe,  and  shudder"  (James  2:  19)  ;  "The  devil  is 
gone  down  unto  you,  having  great  wrath,  knowing  that  he 
hath  but  a  short  time"  (Rev.  12:  12)  ;  "They  worshipped 
the  dragon,  because  he  gave  his  authority  unto  the  beast" 
(Rev.  13:  4)  ;  "Whose  coming  is  according  to  the  working 


138  THEOLOGY. 

of  Satan  with  all  power  and  signs  and  lying  wonders"   (2 
Thess.  2:9). 

4.     THEIR  HABITATION  AND  GRADATION. 

The  present  habitation  of  the  evil  angels,  that  is,  before 
the  judgment,  is  partly  u^vo-o-o?  or  the  abyss.  Tartarus  is 
probably  the  same  place.  They  are  not  consigned  to  Ge- 
henna or  the  everlasting  hell  until  after  the  judgment.  In 
2  Peter  2 :  4  we  read :  ''For  if  God  spared  not  angels  when 
they  sinned,  but  cast  them  down  to  hell  (Gr.  Tartaros), 
and  committed  them  to  pits  of  darkness,  to  be  reserved  to 
judgment."  Whether  or  not  they  are  also  in  Hades,  the 
Scriptures  do  not  say,  but  it  is  possible.  However,  all  the 
evil  spirits  are  not  confined  to  the  abyss,  for  in  Luke  8 :  31 
we  read:  "They  entreated  him  that  he  would  not  command 
them  to  depart  into  the  abyss,"  In  this  connection  we  would 
also  call  attention  to  the  following  passages:  ''The  unclean 
spirit  when  he  is  gone  out  of  the  man,  passeth  through 
waterless  places,  seeking  rest"  (Luke  11:  24)  ;  "The  world- 
rulers  of  this  darkness"  (Eph.  6:  12)  ;  "The  devil,  as  a 
roaring  lion,  walketh  about,  seeking  whom  he  may  devour" 
(1  Peter  5:  8). 

The  evil  angels  are  also  classified.  Satan  is  the  prince  of 
darkness.  The  Scriptures  speak  of  principalities  and  pow- 
ers. "For  our  wrestling  is  not  against  flesh  and  blood,  but 
against  the  principalities,  against  the  powers,  against  the 
world-rulers  of  this  darkness,  against  the  spiritual  hosts  of 
wickedness  in  the  heavenly  places"  (Eph.  6:  12;  cf.  Col. 
2:  15). 

5.     THEIR  OCCUPATION. 

In  every  way  they  seek  to  dishonor  God  and  fight  against 
the  good  angels.  In  relation  to  man  their  desire  is  only  to 
do  injury  to  man  as  an  individual,  to  the  family,  the  Church 
and  the  State. 

The  following  examples  and  passages  may  be  cited  in 
regard  to  their  activity  in  status  oecoyiomicus:  Satan  led 
astray  Saul  and  David,  while  he  tormented  Job.    He  seduced 


THE  ANGELS.  139 

Judas.  Scripture  says  that  Satan  entered  into  him.  Cf. 
John  13:  27.  In  Luke  22:  31  we  read:  "Simon,  Simon,  be- 
hold, Satan  asked  to  have  you,  that  he  might  sift  you  as 
wheat."  Satan  led  Ananias  and  Sapphira  astray  so  that 
they  lied.  A  messenger  of  Satan  buffeted  Paul.  Other  ex- 
amples could  be  cited. 

The  Bible  plainly  teaches  that  Satan  is  a  person  and  not 
a  personification.  The  demons  are  likewise  real  persons. 
Satan  himself  tempted  Eve.  A  devil  or  Satan  also  tempted 
the  Lord.  Judas  Iscariot  was  at  the  time  of  his  treason 
possessed  by  Satan,  At  the  climax  of  anti-Christianity  the 
last  personal  Antichrist  will  be  possessed  by  the  devil. 
Satan  is  not  omnipresent  but  as  ruler  in  the  kingdom  of 
darkness  he  directs  the  demons  and  the  evil  agencies.  There 
are  also  princes  in  Satan's  kingdom.  Compare  Rev.  9:  11, 
where  the  angel  of  the  abyss  is  called  Apollyon, 

Special  attention  must  be  paid  to  those  possessed  by  evil 
spirits.  The  Dogmaticians  speak  of  possessio  corporalis 
and  possessio  spiritualis.  QUENSTEDT  says  that  even  the 
pious  may,  by  way  of  trial,  suffer  from  an  obsessio  corpo- 
ralis, but  not  spiritualis.  Only  the  wicked  can  become  the 
objects  of  spiritual  possession  by  evil  spirits,  but  this  pos- 
sessio spiritualis  also  implies  possessio  corporalis.  There 
are  some  who  have  maintained  that  those  possessed  by  evil 
spirits  have  merely  been  insane,  but  such  an  assertion  is 
contrary  to  Scripture.  There  is  no  ground  for  the  view 
that  Christ  accommodated  Himself  to  the  current  thought 
and  manner  of  speaking  concerning  those  possessed.  The 
whole  attitude  of  our  Lord  in  casting  out  devils  proves 
clearly  that  He  not  only  cured  a  disease  of  the  mind,  but 
that  He  cast  out  evil  spirits.  Among  the  many  examples 
that  could  be  cited  we  would  refer  only  to  the  occasion 
when  He  cast  out  demons  from  the  man  in  the  land  of  the 
Gerasenes.  Cf .  Luke  8 :  26 — 33.  Christ  speaks  to  the  demon 
and  makes  a  clear  distinction  between  the  demons  and  the 
man.  At  that  time  there  were  also  insane  people  who  were 
not  possessed,  and  many  that  were  possessed  who  were  not 
insane,   although  they  appeared  to   be.     Many   were   sick 


140  THKOLOdY. 

because  of  evil  spirits  and  were  healed  when  Christ  cast 
out  the  evil  or  unclean  spirits,  but  the  Lord  also  healed 
many  that  were  not  tormented  by  demons.  Wherefore  there 
is  a  clear  distinction  which  would  not  exist  if  all  diseases 
were  supposed  to  be  caused  by  the  obsession  of  evil  spirits. 
Christ,  who  is  the  personal  Truth,  could  not  have  said  that 
He  cast  out  demons,  if  that  were  not  true.  At  the  present 
time  there  would  seem  to  be  few  cases  of  obsession,  but 
there  have  been  instances  when  no  other  explanation  would 
seem  possible.  It  is  not  strange  that  there  were  so  many 
instances  of  demoniacal  possession  at  the  time  of  our  Lord, 
inasmuch  as  He  had  come  for  the  express  purpose  of  casting 
down  the  works  of  the  devil,  for  which  reason  Satan  was 
more  than  ordinarily  active  in  combating  the  Lord. 

Concerning  the  attempt  of  the  evil  spirits  to  injure  the 
status  ecclesiasticus  and  the  Church  of  Christ  we  would  cite 
the  following :  "While  men  slept,  his  enemy  came  and  sowed 
tares"  (Matt.  13:  25);  "Then  cometh  the  evil  one,  and 
snatcheth  away  that  which  hath  been  sown  in  his  heart" 
(Matt.  13:  19)  ;  "Because  we  would  fain  have  come  unto 
you,  I  Paul  once  and  again;  and  Satan  hindered  us"  (1 
Thess.  2:  18);  "And  the  dragon  waxed  wroth  with  the 
woman,  and  went  away  to  make  war  with  the  rest  of  her 
seed,  that  keep  the  commandments  of  God,  and  hold  the 
testimony  of  Jesus"  (Rev.  12:  17). 

The  evil  spirits  are  also  active  in  Hfatiis  politicus.  Com- 
pare 1  Kings  22:  21;  also  compare  Daniel  10:  13,  where  it 
is  stated  that  the  prince  of  the  kingdom  of  Persia  withstood 
the  Angel  of  the  Lord  twenty-one  days.  "And  they  wor- 
shipped the  dragon,  because  he  gave  his  authority  unto  the 
beast"  (Rev.  13:  4). 

The  old  Dogmaticians  also  speak  of  the  evil  spirits  ap- 
pearing as  ghosts.  In  Isa.  13 :  21  and  also  34 :  14  we  read 
of  doleful  creatures  and  night-monsters.  According  to 
Matt.  14:  26  and  Luke  24:  37  the  disciples  were  troubled 
and  affrighted  because  of  the  appearance  of  ghosts  and 
spirits.  In  proof  of  the  fact  that  the  dead  do  not  as  a  rule 
reveal  themselves  Luke  16:  31  may  be  cited:  "If  they  hear 


THE  ANGELS.  141 

not  Moses  and  the  prophets,  neither  will  they  be  persuaded, 
if  one  rise  from  the  dead." 

Noises  that  are  ascribed  to  ghosts  may  often  be  caused 
by  natural  causes,  but  voices  and  momentary  appearances 
are  often  caused  by  telepathy.  When  it  is  impossible  to 
explain  such  voices  and  appearances  by  natural  causes,  we 
may  be  safe  in  assuming  that  it  is  a  work  of  demons.  Some 
ridicule  Luther  on  account  of  his  belief  in  noises  and  dis- 
turbances as  sometimes  caused  by  demons,  but  Luther,  if 
melancholy  sometimes,  was  not  superstitious  and  fearful. 
The  courageous  monk  at  Worms  could  not  have  seen  ghosts 
in  day-light. 

6.     THE  PUNISHMENT  OF  THE  FALLEN  ANGELS. 

Their  punishment  may  be  said  to  be  twofold :  a.  poena 
privativa,  or  that  they  have  been  cast  out  and  suffered  the 
loss  of  God's  favor  and  all  that  is  implied  in  the  glory  of 
everlasting  life ;  b.  poena  sensus  sen  positiva,  implying  all 
their  suffering  in  this  present  state  and  in  Gehenna  after 
the  judgment. 

7.      NOTES  ON  THE  HISTORY  OF  DOGMA. 

During  the  first  and  second  periods  the  opinion  was  gen- 
eral that  Satan  and  the  evil  angels  were  personal  beings  and 
not  merely  personifications.  The  opinions  were  divided, 
however,  with  regard  to  the  cause  of  their  fall.  There  was 
no  special  dogmatic  development  during  the  Scholastic  pe- 
riod. Luther  had  realistic  conceptions  with  regard  to  the 
spiritual  background  of  evil.  Influenced  by  Pantheism, 
Rationalism  and  other  tendencies,  the  modern  critical  period 
has  embraced  the  theories  of  accommodation  and  personifi- 
cation. This  denial  of  the  clear  teaching  of  the  Word  of 
God  has,  however,  brought  about  a  reaction  in  the  form  of 
Spiritualism  which  has  won  many  adherents.  The  Church 
has  nevertheless  been  strengthened  in  her  faith  and  is  more 
than  ever  conscious  of  the  fact  that  she  has  to  struggle  not 
only  against  evil  men,  but  also  against  personal  evil  spirits. 


142  TIIKOLOGY. 

JusTix  Makiyk.  Athenagokas,  Clement  of  Alexandkia  and  others 
taught  that  the  fall  of  the  angels  was  caused  by  their  marriage  with 
the  daughters  of  men,  whence  came  the  giants  and  intermediate  crea- 
tures which  were  neither  angels  nor  men.  Atiienacokas  also  stated 
that  the  fall  of  the  angels  was  caused  by  their  lust  after  material 
things.  Tatian  taught  that  the  bodies  of  the  angels  consisted  of  air 
and  fire.  Iuen.tsus,  Tertx-lliax  and  Cypkian  said  that  envy  was  the 
cause  of  their  fall.  Origkn  ascribed  their  fall  to  pride.  With  regard 
to  their  bodies  he  taught  that  they  were  more  gross  than  those  of  the 
good  angels,  while  they  needed  sustenance  and  inhaled  the  incense  that 
arose  from  heathen  altars. 

L.ACTA.\Tii-.s  said  that  the  fall  was  caused  by  envy  toward  the  Son 
Augustine  believed  that  the  bodies  of  the  angels  became  more  gross 
in  substance  through  the  fall.  He  says  that  the  cause  of  the  fall  was 
probably  pride,  although  it  cannot  be  explained.  Bokthius  taught  that 
God  created  man  in  order  to  fill  the  gap  that  had  arisen  through  the 
fall  of  the  angels. 

Anselm  likewise  taught  that  pride  was  the  cause  of  the  fall,  and  that 
it  was  God's  purpose  that  man  should  fill  the  place  that  had  been  voided 
by  the  fall  of  the  angels. 

Lx'thkk  considered  that  each  person  was  tormented  by  an  evil  spirit, 
that  Satan  was  closer  to  a  person  than  the  skin  of  the  body,  that  he 
was  the  cause  of  many  bodily  ailments,  etc. 

Semlek  said  that  possessio  diabolica  was  merely  insanity.  The 
Rationalists  declared  that  the  doctrine  of  the  evil  spirits  was  only  an 
accommodation  to  Jewish  ideas.  Sciielling  taught  that  evil  is  the 
motive  power  in  history  and  therefore  necessary.  Sciileier.macher 
denied  the  personality  of  Satan.  Concerning  the  fall  he  said  that  pride 
could  not  have  been  the  cause,  inasmuch  as  that  would  have  implied 
an  antecedent  fall.  He  could  not  understand  why  all  the  angels  did 
not  fall.  Daii!  acknowledges  the  existence  of  Satan  and  sets  forth 
Judas  Iscariot  as  an  incarnation  of  evil.  Stkauss  held  that  at  the  most 
Satan  was  a  personification  of  evil  as  set  forth  in  the  imagination. 
Marten  sen  considers  the  demons  as  impersonal  spirits  or  principles. 
Personality  is  reached  in  the  instrumentality  of  the  evil.  Satan  is 
an  angel  who  occupies  the  center  of  the  kingdom  of  evil. 

From  the  rise  of  modern  Spiritualism  in  the  year  1848,  the  belief  in 
possible  communication  with  the  spirits  of  the  dead  has  had  many 
adherents  and  the  Spiritualists  grow  in  number  and  have  been  con- 
firmed in  their  religious  tenets,  when  prominent  men  and  some  sci- 
entists have  professed  faith  in  mediumship.  In  these  short  notes  on 
the  History  of  Dogmas  we  cannot  discuss  spiritualistic  phenomena,  but 
in  the  study  of  evil  angels  we  have  come  to  the  conclusion  that  the 
so-called  mediums  are  not  of  God,  and  the  so-called  spirits,  in  such 
cases  when  they  evidently  are  spirits  and  not  deceiving  mediums,  are 
demons  and  not  the  souls  of  men.     In  1  Kings  22:  21 — 23  we  read  how 


THE  ANGELS.  143 

God  allowed  a  lying  spirit  to  enter  into  the  prophets  of  Ahab.  We  can 
be  assured  that  God  does  not  give  a  medium  the  key  to  Hades  or 
Paradise  to  call  forth  the  souls  of  the  departed  to  appear  at  a  spirit- 
ualistic gathering.  The  so-called  appearances  of  dead  persons,  if  they 
occur,  are  demons  or  lying  spirits  who  imitate  the  dead  in  speech  and 
manner,  and  the  information  received  is  incoherent  and  of  no  value. 
The  rich  man  in  Hades  could  not  visit  his  brethren,  and  Abraham  did 
not  permit  Lazarus  to  reveal  himself  in  the  house  of  Dives.  When  God 
has  allowed  visits  from  Paradise,  like  Samuel,  Moses,  Elijah  and  the 
raised  dead  after  the  resurrection  of  Christ,  the  appearances  have  been 
clear  and  the  messages  plain.  In  the  appearances  and  revelations  of 
Christ  after  His  resurrection  everything  was  manifest,  convincing  and 
and  of  a  continued  nature.  —  In  the  seances  of  mediums  everything  is 
gloomy,  uncertain  and  ghostly.  And  to  seek  what  God  has  forbidden 
is  sin.  Paul  warns  against  seducing  spirits  and  doctrines  of  demons. 
1  Tim.  4:  1,  2. 


II.     ANTHROPOLOGY. 


Anthropology  is  that  section  of  Dogmatics  which  treats 
of  the  subject  of  man  and  comprises  the  following  main 
divisions:  man  in  general,  his  original  state,  the  doctrine 
of  sin,  or  hamartology,  and  moral  freedom,  or  freedom  of 
the  will. 

§11.    MAN. 

Man  is  a  being  made  up  of  body  and  spirit.  On  his  spir- 
itual side  he  is  a  unit  of  spontaneity  and  receptivity  or  a 
persorial  unity  of  thought,  will  and  feeling.  As  an  intel- 
lectual-corporeal organic  entity  he  is  capable  of  self-con- 
templation and  self-determination.  In  reaching  the  state 
of  self-consciousness  man  looks  upon  himself  as  distinct 
from  the  world  and  yet  as  standing  in  relation  to  it.  But 
he  also  feels  that  he  is  determined  by  something  higher. 
This  feeling  is  inborn.  He  is  determined  by  an  absolute 
being,  while  he  himself  is  a  relative  being. 

1.    The  Creation  of  Man. 

Concerning  the  creation  of  man  in  general  it  may  be  said 
that  he  was  not  created  like  the  irrational  creation  by  the 
simple  mandate  of  God's  almighty  power ;  rather  a  decision 
was  reached  in  the  Godhead  when  the  Lord  said:  "Let  us 
make  man." 

Concerning  the  corporeal  part  of  man  the  following 
ought  to  be  observed:  1)  That  it  was  created,  as  to  time, 
before  the  soul,  for  which  reason  the  theory  that  the  soul 
pre-exists  and  produces  its  own  body  must  be  rejected;  2) 
the  body  was  made  of  the  dust  of  the  ground,  out  of  aphar 
or  damp  earth,  and  adama  or  red  soil.    From  this  we  learn 


MAN.  145 

that  the  component  parts  of  the  human  body  are  made  up 
of  earth  and  water.  Man  is  the  highest  expression  of  na- 
ture and  the  crown  of  creation.  Man  was  intended  to  be 
and  still  remains  a  microcosm  or  a  world  in  himself;  3) 
the  body  was  fashioned  by  God,  but  not  in  a  mechanical 
way  as  a  sculptor  produces  a  statue. 

The  spiritual  nature  of  man  was  produced  when  Jehovah 
Elohim  directly  breathed  into  the  corporeal  formation  the 
breath  of  life  and  man  became  a  living  soul.  This  inbreath- 
ing is  not  to  be  thought  of  as  though  God  had  produced 
some  spiration  outside  of  Himself,  but  He  breathed  out  of 
the  fulness  of  His  being  and  gave  to  man  a  relative  spirit. 
It  was  not  a  gnostic  emanation.  Neither  did  the  creative 
spirit  become  immanent  in  the  human  spirit.  God  is  a 
spirit,  but  man  has  a  spirit,  wherefore  there  is  a  difference 
between  the  Spirit  of  God  and  the  spirit  of  man.  The  race 
of  men  are,  however,  the  offspring  of  God.  We  must  also 
reject  the  theory  of  the  Theosophists  that  the  soul  is  a 
potency  in  the  body  which  came  to  life  through  the  in- 
breathing of  the  Creator.  The  soul  and  the  spirit  are 
identical  in  substance,  but  set  forth  two  different  aspects 
of  man's  spiritual  being.  As  already  stated,  man  became 
a  living  soul  when  God  breathed  into  his  nostrils  the  breath 
of  life.  According  to  Gen.  1 :  27  this  act  of  creation  implied 
that  man  was  made  in  the  image  of  God,  so  that  God  was 
imaged  forth  in  man.  We  may,  for  this  reason,  say  that 
man  became  a  microtheos. 

2.    The   Unity   of   the   Human   Race   and   Divergent 
Theories  of  Creation. 

The  unity  of  the  human  race  must  be  manifest,  inasmuch 
as  it  cannot  be  proved  that  God  created  more  than  one  man 
and  one  woman  as  the  progenitors  of  the  race.  The  unity 
is  evident  when  we  consider  that  God  took  a  rib  from  the 
man  and  made  or  built  woman. 

Among  divergent  theories  concerning  the  creation  of  man 

Dogmatics.     6. 


146  ANTIIROrOLOGY. 

may  be  mentioned:  1)  The  theory  of  the  Preadamites,*  or 
that  men  were  in  existence  before  Adam,  spoken  of  in 
Genesis  1,  while  the  creation  of  Adam  is  first  spoken  of  ex- 
pressly in  the  second  chapter  of  Genesis.  2.  The  theory  of 
the  Coadamites,  or  that  many  pairs  were  created  at  dif- 
ferent places,  which  argument  is  designed  to  explain  the 
origin  of  the  different  races.  3)  The  theory  of  the  Autoch- 
thones, or  that  many  thousands  of  men  have  been  produced 
out  of  the  ground  at  one  time,  so  that  man  has  come  into 
being  without  creation,  produced  from  earth  and  moisture, 
or  from  the  earth  as  heated  by  the  electricity  of  the  air 
(generatio  sequivoca  or  simultanea).  4)  The  Transmuta- 
tion  theory  of  Darwin.  The  main  argument  in  this  theory 
is  not  that  species  of  a  lower  degree  can  develop  into  species 
of  a  higher,  but  concerns  the  factors  by  which  these  trans- 
mutations can  take  place.  Darwin  and  his  followers  say: 
a)  that  in  accordance  with  physico-chemical  laws  in  a 
purely  mechanical  way  a  living  primitive  cell  can  be  formed 
and  develop  out  of  inorganic  bodies  without  the  presence 
of  any  previous  life;  b)  that  in  the  course  of  numberless 
generations  higher  organisms  had  developed  out  of  the 
low^er  organisms  without  the  intervention  of  any  outside 
cause,  the  developments  taking  place  through  blind  causality 
without  any  purpose. 

♦The  words  of  Paul  in  Acts  17:  26  are  literally  true  when  he  de- 
clares that  God  made  of  one  every  nation  of  men  to  dwell  on  all  the 
face  of  the  earth.  The  Athenians  and  the  Greeks  in  general  boasted 
of  springing  from  the  soil  on  which  they  lived.  They  therefore  called 
themselves  autochthones.  The  doctrine  of  Preadamites  has  been  pre- 
sented by  Lanini  of  Solcia,  1459,  by  Isaac  la  Peyrere,  1655,  by  Schelling, 
and  some  others.  But  many  distinguished  scientists,  such  as  Linné, 
Blumenbach,  Prichard,  Buffon,  John  Miiller,  Rudolph  Wagner,  Max 
Miiller,  and  others,  set  forth  the  possibility  and  the  probability  of  the 
unity  of  the  human  race.  The  following  reasons  are  adduced:  1)  The 
races  do  not  lose  their  power  of  procreation  through  mixed  marriages; 

2)  from    the    physiological    standpoint   they    have    much    in    common; 

3)  climate,  diet  and  occupation  explain  the  differences  in  color  etc.; 

4)  the  differences  in  language  can  be  easily  understood,  inasmuch  as 
examples  may  be  cited  where  different  peoples  have  changed  their 
language,  such  as  the  Phoenicians,  the  Longobards,  the  Berbers  in 
Morocco,  and  others;  5)  ethical  and  religious  similarities  also  consti- 
tute an  argument;  6)  the  different  forms  of  religion  may  be  satis- 
factorily explained;  7)  the  more  recent  scientific  research  establishes 
the  teaching  of  the  Bible  concerning  the  unity  of  the  race. 


MAN.  147 

3.    The  Component  Parts  of  Man's  Being  or  Nature. 

Man  possesses  body  and  soul  or  spirit.*  There  are  many 
that  consider  that  man's  nature  consists  of  three  parts,  viz., 
body,  soul  and  spirit.  Compare  1  Thess.  5:  23  and  Heb. 
4:  12.  However,  on  the  basis  of  other  passages  (Matt.  16: 
26 ;  Acts  20  :  10 ;  2  Cor.  12 :  15 ;  Heb.  13  :  17 ;  Rev.  6 :  9,  etc.) , 
where  the  soul  includes  the  spirit  and  the  spirit  the  soul,  we 
may  say  that  the  spiritual  part  of  man  has  two  sides,  the 
spirit,  which  is  turned  toward  God,  and  the  soul,  which  is 
turned  toward  the  body  and  the  matsrial  world.  The  soul 
is  the  form  of  the  spirit  and  mediates  the  connection  of 
the  spirit  with  the  body.  The  dichotomic  theory  is  thus 
acknowledged  to  be  the  correct  one,  but  the  trichotomic 
theory  is  accorded  a  certain  degree  of  recognition. 

*  Theological  anthropology  does  not  contain  an  extended  treatment 
of  somatology  or  psychology,  but  views  man  from  the  theologico-ethical 
viewpoint.  Although  the  spiritual  side  of  man  is  emphasized  more 
than  the  corporeal,  still  the  significance  of  the  body  is  not  to  be  under- 
estimated, for  the  body  is  the  dwelling-place  of  the  spirit,  and  it  is 
called  the  temple  of  the  Holy  Ghost.  Furthermore,  the  body  has  great 
significance  because  of  the  resurrection.  But  the  spiritual  part  of  man 
is  comparatively  of  the  greatest  importance,  inasmuch  as  the  spirit  in 
man  functions  through  the  body  and  exerts  its  influence  upon  it.  The 
spiritual  part  of  man,  the  soul  or  the  spirit,  is  the  expression  of  the 
personality,  which  is  characterized  by  self-consciousness  and  self- 
determination.  Many  attempts  have  been  made  to  define  the  soul  or 
the  spirit,  but  no  entirely  satisfactory  definition  has  been  made.  The 
activity  of  the  soul  can  be  more  readily  described  than  its  essence. 
The  substance  of  the  soul  is  not  material,  yet  real.  Although  the  soul 
or  the  spirit  in  this  life  is  dependent  upon  a  material  nervous  system 
for  its  contact  with  and  its  activity  in  the  material  world  about  us, 
nevertheless  this  does  not  prove  that  the  soul  does  not  possess  its  own 
spiritual  powers  and  faculties.  The  soul  is  conscious  of  many  things 
that  are  not  material.  It  knows  that  it  is  a  thing  apart  from  the  senses 
that  it  uses.  The  human  soul  is  capable  of  knowing  itself.  It  knows 
of  its  own  existence,  because  it  thinks  in  a  self-conscious  and  self- 
determinative  way.  It  has  been  proved  that  the  soul  thinks  even  when 
every  part  of  the  brain  has  been  injured.  The  spirit,  which  is,  so  to 
speak,  the  soul  of  the  soul,  is  conscious  of  its  relationship  with  the 
Father  of  Spirits.  The  purely  spiritual  thinking  may  be  perfectly 
clear,  even  when  the  mind  functions  abnormally  with  regard  to  ma- 
terial things.  It  has  been  conslusively  proven  that  the  soul  or  the 
spirit  belongs  not  only  to  this  world,  but  also  to  the  invisible  world 
of  the  spirit.  The  soul  is  everywhere  present  in  the  whole  human 
organism,  with  which  it  stands  in  the  closest  possible  union.  The 
Scriptures  speak  of  an  inward  as  well  as  an  outward  man.  Cf.  Rom'. 
7:   22;   2  Cor.  4:    16;   Eph.  3:   16.     In  1  Peter  3:   4  the  inward  man  is 

called     o  KpVTTTO'i  Tr}<i  KapSt'fi.?  av^pcoTTO?. 


148  ANTHROPOLOGY. 

The  dichotomic  view  being-  the  correct  one  and  different 
expressions  being  used  for  the  spiritual  part  of  man,  we 
must  investigate  how  unity  in  teaching  may  be  attained. 
In  a  dogmatic  text-book  we  cannot  study  the  exegetical  ex- 
pressions in  the  various  forms  in  which  they  occur.  But 
there  must  be  some  usage  which  makes  the  distinction  clear. 
It  is  evident  that  spirit  is  used  to  express  the  animating 
principle,  and  soul,  the  animated  result.  If  spirit  expresses 
the  life  principle  directly  inbreathed  by  God,  it  is  clear  why 
"spirit"  is  used  in  John  19:  30,  "And  gave  up  his  spirit." 
And  in  John  10:  11  soul  (transl.  from  the  Greek,  psyche) 
is  used,  although  the  translators  hav'3  rendered  the  Greek 
to  mean  'life.'  The  psyche  or  soul  means  here  the  entire 
being  as  the  human  life.  Compare  Rev,  20 :  4,  w^here  souls 
are  mentioned.  But  in  fact  spirit  and  soul  is  the  same 
entity  looked  upon  from  different  viewpoints.  The  soul- 
spirit  or  spirit-soul  is  the  same  spiritual  nature  in  man. 
The  soul  is  of  one  nature  with  the  spirit. 

In  Biblical  psychology  the  expression  heart  is  prominent. 
The  Bible  phrase  "the  life  (or  soul)  ip  in  the  blood"  called 
attention  to  the  organ  of  the  distribution  of  the  blood.  The 
heart  came  to  be  looked  upon  as  the  collective  focus  of  the 
personal  energies.  Just  as  Harvey's  famous  discovery  of 
the  circulation  of  the  blood  showed  the  importance  of  the 
heart  as  the  center  of  the  going  and  returning  of  the  blood, 
the  heart  was  looked  upon  from  oldert  times  at  least  meta- 
phorically as  the  central  seat  of  the  circulation  of  the  mental 
and  moral  activities.  But  Ecclesiastes  12 :  6  proves  that  the 
wise  Solomon  had  discovered  the  circulation  of  the  blood  and 
also  claimed  that  there  is  nothing  new  under  the  sun.  But 
whatever  the  reason  there  are  many  Bible  references  to  the 
heart  in  regard  to  man's  mental  and  moral  life.  Among 
the  many  references  we  quote  the  following:  Deut.  11:  13: 
"And  to  serve  him  (Jehovah)  with  all  your  heart  and  with 
all  your  soul,"  Ps.  90:  12:  "Get  us  a  heart  of  wisdom," 
Matt.  6:  21:  "There  will  thy  heart  be,"  Matt,  15:  19:  "For 
out  of  the  heart  come  forth  evil  thoughts,"  According  to 
philosophical    psychology   thoughts   come    forth   from    the 


MAN.  149 

brain.  In  the  Bible  conscience  takes  its  place  beside  the 
heart  as  the  legislative  and  critical  function  of  the  inner 
man.  When  the  spirit  represents  the  principle  of  life,  the 
soul  stands  for  the  personality  and  the  heart  is  the  organ 
of  life.  Mind  in  philosophy  and  general  usage  would  cor- 
respond to  soul  in  Biblical  phra'seology.  Many  psychologists 
deny  the  existence  of  the  soul  and,  therefore,  reject  the 
doctrine  of  immortality.  According  to  these  scientists  mind 
is  identical  with  the  brain.  From  the  Christian  viewpoint 
the  brain  is  the  instrument  used  by  the  soul. 

4.    The  Propagation  of  the  Soul. 

There  are  three  theories  that  have  been  presented  and 
are  still  being  defended  by  prominent  theologians  and 
thinkers  on  this  subject,  viz.:  1)  The  Pre-existence  Theory, 
which  teaches  that  all  souls  came  into  being  before  time 
was,  or  before  they  were  united  with  men.  2)  Creationism, 
which  teaches  that  every  soul  is  brought  forth  by  an  im- 
mediate act  of  creation.  3)  Traducianism,  which  teaches 
that  the  soul  of  each  individual  person  is  propagated  with 
the  body.  This  last-named  theory  is  the  correct  one.  Some 
Dogmaticians  have  accorded  to  the  Creationist  theory  a 
certain  degree  of  recognition,  acknowledging  that  God  acts 
immediately  in  the  matter  of  the  soul's  endowment.  The 
following  Scripture  passages  may  be  observed  in  relation 
to  Traducianism :  "Adam  begat  a  son  in  his  own  likeness, 
after  his  own  image"  (Gen.  5:3).  Compare  Gen.  1:  28; 
9:  1;  46:  26;  Ps.  51:  7;  Acts  17:  24—26. 

The  Pre-existence  theory  confines  the  idea  of  species  to 
the  body,  as  the  soul  existed  before  the  creation  of  Adam. 
According  to  this  theory  the  Fall  occurred  before  the  sixth 
day  or  in  a  timeless  condition.  Some  hold  that  it  happened 
in  an  ante-mundane  state  and  others,  in  a  supra-temporal; 
the  latter  view  was  held  by  Julius  Miiller,  which  was  in  fact 
the  doctrine  of  Kant,  who  held  the  conception  of  sin  as  a 
noumenon  which  always  is  both  timeless  and  spaceless. 
Creationism  is  like  the  theory  of  Pre-existence  except  in 


150  .  ANTHUOPOLOGY. 

regard  to  the  time  when  the  soul  was  created.  In  both 
views  the  body  was  propagated  and  the  soul  was  individual 
and  had  no  race-existence  in  Adam.  According  to  Crea- 
tionism  the  soul  was  a  new  creation  and  united  with  the 
human  body  about  the  40th  day  after  the  conception.  This 
theory  teaches  a  continued  'creation  which  is  in  conflict 
with  the  Word  of  God.  Traducianism  or  the  theory  of 
mediate  creationism  teaches  that  both  body  and  soul  are 
derived  from  the  parents,  which  is  the  best  explanation  of 
original  and  hereditary  sin.  Inherited  sin  and  guilt  cannot 
be  explained  by  imputatio  immediata  or  the  theory  of  rep- 
resentative or  forensic  union  with  Adam,  as  such  immediate 
imputation  would  not  be  just,  when  we  consider  that  the 
posterity  had  not  chosen  Adam  as  a  representative,  not 
existing  at  the  time  of  Adam  and  his  test.  But  according 
to  Traducianism  and  mediate  imputation  the  problem  may 
be  more  easily  solved,  although  it  belongs  to  the  mysteries 
of  Providence.  In  the  scheme  of  the  theory  of  Pre-existence 
the  problem  why  all  human  souls  fell  in  the  pre-existing 
state  remains  unsolved.  And  if  the  idea  of  Creationism  is 
accepted,  the  sinful  condition  would  be  in  the  body,  and  the 
pure  soul  would  be  contaminated  after  its  creation  without 
any  probation  in  the  union  with  the  body. 

Traducianism  is  plainly  taught  in  the  Scriptures.  We 
cannot  investigate  exegetically  all  the  passages.  In  Rom. 
5 :  12  the  original  rendering  yjixupTov  proves  or  at  least 
strongly  supports  the  Traducian  view.  It  is  an  active  form. 
Therefore,  if  all  sinned  in  Adam,  they  must  have  existed 
in  him.  In  1  Cor.  15:  22  we  read:  "In  Adam  all  die." 
Notice  in  the  Greek  the  article  before  "Adam."  As  in  Gen, 
1 :  27  "man"  denotes  Adam  and  Eve  and  includes  the  whole 
species.  To  die  in  Adam  implies  existence  in  him.  The 
whole  human  race  was  in  Adam  and  sinned  in  him.  Pos- 
terity was  not  present  at  the  Fall  as  individual  persons  with 
self-consciousness  and  self-determination,  but  the  race  was 
there  invisibly  and  yet  really,  which  explains  why  all  sinned 
in  and  with  Adam.  Some  argue  that  this  works  injustice 
to  posterity,  individuals  of  which  might  not  have  failed  in 


MAN.  151 

the  test.  But  if  Adam  had  not  included  the  race,  if  man 
had  been  created  like  the  angels,  the  outcome  might  not 
have  been  better  but  rather  worse,  as  the  fallen  angels  can- 
not be  saved.  All  human  beings  have  the  opportunity  to 
return  to  God  and  be  saved.  God  has  sent  the  second  Adam, 
the  Second  Person  in  the  Trinity,  Jesus  Christ,  that  all 
who  believe  in  Him  shall  be  saved.  God  has  provided  the 
means  both  objectively  and  subjectively.  If  many  reject 
the  simple  test  and  resist  the  operations  of  the  Holy  Spirit, 
it  is  their  own  fault.  The  condition  in  the  test  for  returning 
is  in  fact  easier  than  the  test  of  Adam  and  Eve,  although 
no  one  can  complain  that  the  probationary  test  of  man  was 
unreasonable.  Man  was  created  good  and  was  only  re- 
quested to  obey  a  certain  commandment,  which  was  com- 
paratively easy. 

We  desire  to  add  an  explanation  of  the  rneaning  of  nu- 
merical and  specific  unity,  which  makes  it  easier  to  under- 
stand Traducianism.  A  numerical  unity  may  both  be  and 
not  be  a  specific  unity.  In  the  Trinity  there  is  a  numerical 
unity  of  nature,  as  there  is  only  one  essence,  but  there  is 
no  specific  unity,  because  the  one  nature  in  God  cannot  bs 
divided,  as  each  hypostasis  in  the  Trinity  possesses  the 
whole  essence  and  there  is  no  division  of  the  divine  nature, 
only  modification  in  mode  of  subsistence  in  the  internal 
relation.  But  if  we  consider  man,  the  unity  is  both  numeri- 
cal and  specific.  In  Adam  the  human  nature  was  specifically 
and  numerically  one  at  the  same  time,  but  by  propagation 
the  one  human  nature  has  become  a  multitude  of  persons, 
who  are  still  specifically  one,  —  In  regard  to  the  presence 
of  the  race  in  Adam  the  following  observations  may  make 
it  plainer.  The  species  contain  all  the  individuals.  The 
first  acorn  cell  implanted  in  creation  by  God  contained  all 
the  oaks.  The  great  oak  tree  was  once  a  mere  acorn.  One 
cell  divides  indefinitely  and  produces  the  same  kind.  Tho 
product  is  as  old  as  the  parent  cell.  Sexual  propagation 
illustrates  the  same  principle.  Man  has  two  existences,  one 
kind  in  Adam  as  an  invisible  principle,  another  as  indi- 
vidualized nature  in  persons.     The  one  human  nature  in 


152  ANTHROPOLOGY. 

Adam  was  an  entity ;  the  multitude  of  men  propagated  from 
Adam  is  likewise  an  entity.  The  invisible  principles  to  be 
individualized  in  the  posterity  were  not  atoms,  nor  were 
they  only  ideas.  A  specific  nature  constituted  to  continue 
by  propagation  has  a  real  existence.  Human  reason  cannot 
comprehend  the  laws  of  the  spiritual  world,  hence  the  in- 
visible existence  made  visible  by  propagation  in  conception 
is  a  mystery.  But  the  Word  of  God  has  revealed  the  fact 
that  there  is  such  a  mystery.  Besides  the  passages  referred 
to,  notice  Heb.  7:  10,  "For  he  was  yet  in  the  loins  of  his 
father,"  and  compare  Ps.  13:  15,  16;  Jer.  1:  5.  Note  also 
the  invisibles  mentioned  in  Col.  1 :  16  and  the  "things  not 
seen"  in  Heb.  11 :  1 — 3.  Agazziz  and  other  scientists  speak 
of  the  real  invisibles  behind  the  first  appearance.  The  en- 
tire substance,  both  physical  and  psychical  or  spiritual,  was 
propagated  and  existed  both  as  physical  and  psychical,  as 
things  not  seen,  from  the  creation  of  Adam.  And  by  the 
laws  of  propagation,  conception  and  birth  they  become 
visible  as  individualized  human  beings.  The  doctrine  of 
Traducianism  throws  a  clear  light  on  the  conception  of 
original  sin  and  its  imputation. 

5.    Notes  on  the  History  of  Dogma. 

The  teachers  in  the  Orient  in  general  accepted  the  Tri- 
chotomistic  theory.  The  theory  of  Dichotomy  gained  head- 
way on  the  ground  of  the  teaching  of  Apollinaris.  Even 
in  the  primitive  Church  the  three  different  theories  of  the 
propagation  of  the  soul  were  current.  Tertullian  held 
the  Traducian  view,  Origen  the  theory  of  Pre-existence, 
while  Lactantius  adopted  the  Creationist  theory.  As  early 
as  the  middle  of  the  sixth  century  the  theory  of  Pre- 
existence  was  condemned  as  a  heresy.  During  the  Middle 
Ages  and  within  the  Catholic  Church  the  theory  of  Crea- 
tionism  was  generally  advocated.  The  theologians  of  the 
liUtheran  Church  have  as  a  rule  advocated  Dichotomy  and 
Traducianism.  The  theory  of  Pre-existence  has  gained 
many  distinguished  adherents  in  recent  times.     However, 


MAN.  153 

Traducianism  is  the  view  held  by  all  orthodox  and  conserva- 
tive theologians,  because  according  to  this  theory  the  trans- 
mission of  original  sin  can  best  be  explained. 

Plato  taUght  that  man  had  a  two-fold  soul,  an  intellectual  and  a 
sensual  one.  He,  and  later  Philo,  advocated  the  theory  of  Pre-existence. 
Akistotle  was  a  Creationist.  Justiin^  Martyr  held  the  Trichotomic 
view.  Tatian  taught  that  before  the  fall  man  possessed  body,  soul, 
which  w^as  material,  and  spirit.  The  latter  was  lost  in  the  Fall,  but 
could  be  regained.  Good  men  had  a  body,  soul  and  spirit,  but  evil 
men  had  only  body  and  soul.  Clement  of  Alexandria  was  a  Crea- 
tionist. Tebtullian  taught  Dichotomy  and  Traducianism.  Concern- 
ing the  soul  he  said  that  it  possesses  form  and  members  like  the  body, 
that  it  increases  in  size  with  the  growth  of  the  body.  Okigen  taught 
Trichotomy  and  the  theory  of  Pre-existence.  The  souls  were  con- 
signed to  bodies  because  of  the  sins  that  they  had  committed  in  the 
ante-temporal  state. 

Arnobius  said  that  the  souls  were  not  created  by  God,  but  by  lesser 
spirits,  and  that  the  soul  was  material.  Gregory  of  Nazianzus  advo- 
cated Dichotomy.  Gregory  of  Nyssa  taught  Trichotomy  and  Tradu- 
cianism. He  said  that  there  was  no  sexual  relationship  before  the 
Fall.  Jerome  taught  Dichotomy.  Augustine  taught  the  same  together 
with  the  immateriality  of  the  soul.  The  doctrine  of  Pre-existence  was 
pronounced  heretical  at  the  meeting  of  Constantinople  in  543.  John 
OF  Damascus  taught  Dichotomy. 

Anselm,  Petek  Lombard  and  Thomas  Acquinas  advocated  Crea- 
tionism.  The  last  named  made  a  distinction  between  anima  sensitiva 
and  intellectiva.  The  former  was  propagated  in  a  physical  way,  but 
not  the  latter.  He  taught,  in  common  with  the  majority  of  the  Scholas- 
tics of  the  Middle  Ages,  the  theory  of  Dichotomy. 

Luther  taught  Dichotomy  and  Traducianism.  Melanciithon  advo- 
cated Creationism.  Luther  acknowledged  that  there  was  some  truth 
in  Creationism.  The  old  Lutheran  Dogmaticians  taught  Traducianism. 
Calixtus  and  Mus.eus  advocated  Creationism. 

The  modern  Arminians,  following  the  ancient  Semi-Pelagians,  hold 
the  view  of  representative  union  only.  Posterity  is  not  guilty  of 
Adam's  first  sin  either  as  to  culpability  or  liability  to  punishment,  but 
suffers  from  it  as  in  spiritual  weakness,  bodily  sickness  and  death. 
The  real  guilt  and  consequences  depend  upon  actual  sin. 

Kant  taught  the  theory  of  Pre-existence  and  explained  the  radical 
evil  in  man  on  the  basis  of  deeds  done  in  the  ante-temporal  state. 
Julius  Muller  also  advocated  the  theory  of  Pre-existence  or  rather 
an  extra-temporal  state.  Hakless,  Nitzsch,  Beck,  Kahnis  and 
Thomasius  were  Dichotomists,  while  Olshausen,  Neander,  Meyer, 
Lange  and  Delitzsch,  to  a  greater  or  less  extent,  were  Trichotomists.. 


154  ANTHROPOLOGY. 

In  his  Psychology  Dklitzsch  accords  as  much  recognition  as  possible 
to  Trichotomy.  In  like  manner  as  the  Triune  God  possesses  a  seven- 
fold 8o^a  through  the  Spirit,  so  the  spirit  of  man  also  possesses  a 
sevenfold  Sa^j,  which  reveals  itself  first  in  the  soul  and  through  the 
soul  in  the  body.  The  soul  is  the  image  of  the  spirit,  and  the  body 
is  the  image  of  the  soul.  The  human  ego  is  called  näphäsh  or  soul, 
because  the  soul  is  the  medium  or  form  of  the  human  personality. 
But  the  soul  itself  is  personal  only  because  of  the  Immanence  of  the 
spirit.  Delitzscii  explains  the  beginning  of  the  soul's  existence  in  tli3 
following  way:  The  first  step  in  the  process  is  contractio,  thereafter 
expansio  or  reaching  out,  then  rotatio,  or  the  process  of  becomin.g, 
thereafter  comes  life  and  then  reflection,  followed  by  the  sixth  power 
or  manif^estatio  (Aoyos  évSiaöeros  becomes  Aoyos  7rpo<j!>o/jtAcd?  i  j  the 
seventh  power  includes  aU  the  others  and  constitutes  the  substanti- 
ality of  the  soul  as  the  image  of  the  spirit.  All  this  expresses  the 
internal  relationship  between  the  soul  and  the  spirit,  but  the  spirit 
through  the  medium  of  the  soul  must  enter  into  relationship  with  the 
body.  The  soul  possesses,  therefore,  a  sevenfold  86$a  and,  as  Luther 
says,  constitutes  the  seven-armed  candlestick  in  the  sanctuary.  When 
tho  soul  reveals  its  seven  forms  of  life,  it  appears  in  the  first  place  as 
an  embryo;  the  second  form  is  breathing;  the  third  is  the  blood,  for 
which  reason  it  is  said  that  the  soul  is  in  the  blood;  the  fourth  form 
is  the  heart,  which  is  the  drive-wheel  of  life;  the  fifth  form  is  the 
nervous  system,  including  the  brain,  through  which  medium  thought 
becomes  possible,  and  by  which  the  soul,  and  through  the  soul  tho 
spirit,  may  enter  into  relationship  with  the  external  world;  the  sixth 
form  is  the  productive  form  or  the  power  of  speech,  which  reveals 
the  inward  man,  while  the  seventh  form  is  the  outward  form  or  the 
lJ.op(f)i]  of  the  soul.* 


§12.     THE  ORIGINAL  STATE. 

Status  integritatis  vel  innocenti^  is  the  original  con- 
dition of  man  as  created  in  the  image  of  God,  which  implied 
especially  wisdom  in  understanding,  holiness  in  will,  and 
purity  in  feeling. 

In  defining  the  image  of  God  we  confine  ourselves  espe- 
cially to  the  spiritual  nature  of  man,  although  the  corporeal 
nature  must  also  be  considered.  Man  is  made  up  of  soul 
or  spirit  and  body,  but  inasmuch  as  he  became  a  living  soul 
through  the  spirit,  we  hold  forth  man  as  a  unit  of  intellect, 

*  Delitzsch,  Biblical  Psychology,  IV,  §VI. 


THE  ORIGINAL  STATE.  155 

will  and  emotion.  Inasmuch  as  religion  was  and  in  a  cer- 
tain sense  still  remains  basic  in  man's  nature,  so  the  formal 
aspect  of  religion  will  likewise  appear  as  a  unit  of  the  three 
basic  concepts  that  constitute  human  personality,  for  which 
reason  we  must  conceive  of  the  image  of  God,  not  only  in 
a  general  sense,  referring  to  man  as  a  person,  but  take  into 
consideration  the  qualitative  distinction.  The  thought  of 
man  could  not  be  content  with  derivative  knowledge,  but 
sought  God  directly  and  found  rest  in  Him,  who  also  be- 
came the  light  of  his  reason.  Furthermore  his  will  was 
determined  by  the  will  of  God,  while  his  emotional  nature 
found  peace  alid  happiness  in  God. 

God  is  absolutely  free,  while  man  possesses  only  relative 
freedom.  However,  man  was  not  to  render  obedience  by 
reason  of  any  arbitrary  law.  In  human  freedom  two  fac- 
tors must  be  taken  into  consideration,  viz.,  self-determina- 
tion and  determination.  If  we  consider  the  determining 
activity  of  God  to  the  exclusion  of  human  self-determina- 
tion, the  result  would  be  determinism;  contrariwise,  the 
result  would  be  arbitrariness.  Created  freedom  was  to  be 
realized  by  way  of  choice.  For  this  reason  man  could 
either  sin  or  refrain  from  sinning.  He  could  not  remain 
neutral.  The  will  of  God  became  a  factor  as  the  source  or 
motive  of  his  actions,  but  he  was  conscious  of  the  fact  that 
he  could  act  contrary  to  this  motive.  Augustine  said  that 
man's  original  nature  was  posse  non  peccare,  which  was 
to  become  non  posse  peccare. 

In  Gen.  1 :  27  the  Hebrew  expressions  tzelem  and  demuth 
are  used  to  set  forth  the  image  of  God.  The  latter  is  an 
exegetical  expression  of  the  former.  The  Latin  expressions 
are  imago  and  similitudo.  Hollazius  says  that  imago  is 
not  the  same  as  vestigium,  inasmuch  as  imago  clearly  por- 
trays the  original  of  which  it  is  an  image,  while  vestigium 
is  only  a  dim  portrayal.  The  image  of  God  was  clear  and 
not  dim. 


156  ANTHROPOLOGY. 

1.    Divisions  and  Attributes. 

The  image  of  God  is  divided  into  the  formal  and  material 
images. 

A.  The  Formal  Image. — By  the  formal  image  is  meant 
the  human  personality  as  consisting  of  the  faculties  of  in- 
tellect, will  and  emotion.  The  content  of  these  faculties  is 
not  taken  into  consideration,  the  question  concerns  merely 
the  concept  of  personality.  If  the  formal  image  were  lost, 
the  essence  of  man  would  be  destroyed.  The  formal  image, 
therefore,  cannot  be  lost,  for  which  reason  it  is  called 
essential.  The  old  writers  called  it  imago  Dei.  The  formal 
image  of  God  is  imago  Dei  late  dicta,  generaliter  et  abusive 
spectata  or  dKv/jw?.  In  considering  the  formal  image  per  se, 
or  the  image  of  God  as  both  formal  and  material,  we  must 
bear  in  mind  that  the  image  of  God  is  not  man  in  the  sense 
that  he  is  a  portrait  of  God,  but  that  the  image  is  in  man. 
Man  is  a  relative  personality. 

B.  The  Material  Image. — ^By  this  is  meant  the  original 
endowment  or  the  qualitative  content  of  the  formal  image 
of  God.  This  is  the  image  of  God  in  a  special  sense.  For 
this  reason  it  is  also  called  imago  Dei  stricte  dicta  or  Kvpiws. 
It  is  also  called  primaria  or  accidental.  The  old  writers 
called  it  similitudo  Dei.  As  embodying  all  these  attributes 
it  is  called  oAikw?  ;  as  embodying  only  the  essential  it  is 
called  jat/utKws. 

The  material  image  of  God  is  divided  as  follows:  a)  per- 
fectiones  principale's  or  the  essential  perfections,  also  ex- 
pressed by  justitia  originalis  or  the  original  righteousness, 
meaning  enlightenment  in  the  understanding,  holiness  in 
the  will,  and  purity  in  the  emotions.  In  his  original  state 
man  was  perfect,  yet  undeveloped.  However,  it  was  not 
the  helpless  condition  of  a  child.  Neither  were  the  wisdom 
in  the  understanding,  the  holiness  of  will  and  the  blessed- 
ness in  feeling  possessed  only  in  nuce.  Man  was  created 
in  the  mature  state;  b)  perfectiones  minus  principales  or 
the  less  essential  perfections  were:  1)  impassibilitas  or 
that  man  was  not  subject  to  suffering.    Originally  the  body 


THE  ORIGINAL  STATE.  157 

was  a  pure  and  faultless  organ  or  instrument  of  a  pure  and 
holy  spirit.  There  was  perfect  harmony  between  the  sen- 
suous appetites  and  the  higher  life  of  man.  This  harmony 
the  Apology  calls  sequale  temperamenhim  qualitaUmi  cor- 
poris; 2)  immortalitas  or  immortality.  In  case  man  had 
remained  in  status  integritatis,  he  would  have  undergone 
a  transformation  without  the  intervention  of  death  and 
would  have  been  translated  with  a  pneumatic  body  into  the 
world  of  glory;  3)  dominium  in  creatui'os,  or  that  man  was 
lord  of  creation.  He  stood  in  perfect  harmony  with  nature 
and  was  the  crown  of  creation. 

2.    The  Attributes  of  the  Image  of  God. 

The  attributes  (affectiones)  that  are  ascribed  to  the 
image  of  God  are:  a)  concreata  or  concreated,  so  that  the 
image  was  in  no  sense  increased  after  creation.  The 
Roman  Catholic  Church  teaches  that  man  was  created  in  a 
purely  natural  condition  (status  purorum  naturalium).  He 
possessed  intellect  and  free  will,  but  was  without  character. 
He  was  neither  good  nor  bad.  In  addition  God  had  bestowei 
upon  him  a  donum  superadditum,  which  was  a  gift  of  grace, 
and  which  did  not  belong  to  his  nature,  through  which  his 
development  in  the  right  direction  would  be  rendered  more 
easy.  Hollazius  has  compared  this  gift  with  the  bit  that 
directs  the  horse.  Some  Catholic  Dogmaticians  have  taught 
that  this  gift  was  bestowed  after  creation;  b)  natur alis  or 
natural.  According  to  Quenstedt  this  attribute  has  five 
specific  significations:  1)  constitutive,  or  that  which  con- 
stitutes nature  itself  or  an  essential  part  of  it,  such  as 
soul  and  body,  2)  consecutive,  or  that  which  is  derived  from 
nature,  such  as  the  faculties  of  the  soul,  3)  subjective,  or 
that  which  adheres  to  nature  as  a  natural  property,  4)  per- 
fective,  or  that  which  perfects  and  adorns  it  internally,  5) 
transitive,  or  that  which  is  transplanted.  We  conceive  of 
naturalis  according  to  the  last  three  significations;  c) 
2)ropagabilis  ad  posteros,  or  the  propagation  to  posterity; 
d)   accidentalis  or  accidental,  inasmuch  as  it  was  not  the 


158  '  ANTIIKOI'OLOGY. 

essence  of  man,  but  a  qualification  in  his  essence.  This 
was  taught  against  Flacius,  who  maintainfd  that  the  image 
of  God  was  essential.  This  term  has  also  been  employed 
in  order  to  distinguish  between  the  image  of  God  in  man 
and  the  substantial  image  of  God  or  the  Son.  In  the  Son 
the  image  is  original,  uncreated,  and  in  relation  to  man, 
prototypical  (Hollazius:  ''He  exhibits  in  Himself  the  en- 
tire essence  of  the  Father,  being  distinguished  from  Him 
by  the  mode  of  His  subsistence")  ;  e)  amissibilis,  or  that 
the  image  can  be  lost. 

With  regard  to  the  image  of  God  in  general  the  following 
passages  may  be  observed:  "(lod  created  man  in  his  own 
image"  (Gen.  1:  27);  "God  saw  everything  that  he  had 
made,  and,  behold,  it  was  very  good"  (Gen.  1:  31)  ;  cf.  Gen. 
9:6;  "And  put  on  the  new  man,  that  after  God  hath  been 
created  in  righteousness  and  holiness  of  truth"  (Eph.  4: 
24)  ;  "And  have  put  on  the  new  man,  that  is  being  renewed 
unto  knowledge  after  the  image  of  him  that  created  him" 
(Col.  3:  10)  ;  "Men,  who  are  made  after  the  likeness  of 
God"   (James  3:9). 

3.    The  Purpose  or  the  Object  of  the  Image  of  God. 

Finis  is  conceived  of  either  specialiter  or  generaliter. 
In  the  first  sense,  or  specialiter,  the  object  is  thought  of  as: 

1)  jyroximus,  or  the  immediate  object,  which  implies  that 
man  may  live  a  godly  life,  well-pleasing  unto  the  Lord; 

2)  remotior,  or  the  more  remote  object,  which  consists  in 
everlasting  salvation.  Generaliter.  In  this  sense  the  object 
is  the  glory  of  the  divine  wisdom,  power  and  goodness. 

4.    Notes  on  the  History  of  Dogma. 

During  the  first  period  it  was  generally  acknowledged 
that  the  Mosaical  story  of  Paradise  and  man  was  real  his- 
tory. Origen  departed  from  this  view.  The  image  of  God 
was  thought  to  consist  in  intellect  and  freedom,  while  stress 
was  also  laid  on  the  formal  content.  It  was  also  argued 
that  the  material  image  could  be  lost.    The  same  views  were 


THE  ORIGINAL   STATE.  159 

current  during  the  period  that  followed.  The  Roman  Cath- 
olic conception,  developed  during  the  Scholastic  period, 
made  a  sharp  distinction  between  imago  Dei  and  similitude 
Dei,  the  latter  being  conceived  of  as  implying  an  extra  gift 
of  grace.  Both  set  forth  a  concreated  and  special  gift  of 
grace.  The  power  to  overcome  the  sensual  in  man's  nature 
was  not  a  natural  gift,  but  was  added  by  (iod  as  a  special 
gift.  liUTHER  rejected  this  Scholastic  teaching.  Our  con- 
fessional writings  clearly  set  forth  the  formal  and  material 
concepts  of  the  image  of  God.  The  old  Dogmaticians  taught 
as  did  Luther  and  said  that  justitia  originalis  was  not  a 
bonum  superadditum,  but  a  concreated  perfection.  The 
Socinians  and  the  Arminians  did  not  acknowledge  the  doc- 
trine of  the  Church  on  the  original  state.  The  Rationalists 
declare  that  the  original  state  consisted  simply  in  good 
traits.  In  general  the  philosophers  reject  the  truth  of  the 
account  in  Genesis.  Among  theologians  Schleiermacher 
and  those  most  closely  associated  with  him  in  thought  took 
a  position  nearly  akin  to  Rationalism  in  relation  to  the 
historical  content  of  Genesis.  They  limited  the  original 
perfection  to  a  consciousness  of  God.  Many  of  the  leading 
Dogmaticians  in  modern  times,  however,  favor  the  old 
orthodox  view. 

Justin  Martyk  and  many  of  the  older  Church  Fathers  taught  that 
the  image  of  God  consisted  in  intellect  and  freedom.  Justin  also 
stressed  the  ethical  content.  The  similitude  was  also  extended  to  the 
body.  The  Encratites  and  the  Severians  denied  that  women  were 
made  in  the  image  of  God.  Iren.eus  and  Tertxtllian  extended  the 
likeness  unto  God  even  to  the  body.  The  former  stated  that  Adam 
possessed  the  garment  of  righteousness,  but  that  his  state  was  not 
that  of  the  matured  man,  but  must  be  developed.  Origen  said  that  the 
story  of  Paradise  was  an  allegory.  Together  with  Clement  of  Alex- 
andria he  taught  that  death  was  natural  even  in  the  original  state  of 
integrity. 

The  Audians  limited  the  image  of  God  to  the  body.  Augustine  said 
that  the  prototype  of  the  creation  of  man  was  the  Trinity.  It'  had 
previously  been  taught  that  it  was  the  Logos.  He  not  only  sets  forth 
the  image  of  God  as  memoria,  intelligentia  and  voluntas,  but  also  the 
positive  inclination  of  the  spirit  to  that  which  is  good.  In  regard  to 
death  he  used  the  same  terms  as  with  relation  to  sin.     Before  the  Fall 


160  ANTIlKOl'OI.OfiY. 

man  possessed  posse  noii  mori,  which  was  to  be  transformed  into  non 
posse  mori.  Cykil  of  Alexandria  taught  that  a  positive  inclination 
toward  good  was  implanted  in  the  first  man.  Man  was  righteous  and 
good.  He  says,  however,  that  man  received  the  Spirit  of  God,  basing 
his  assertion  on  Gen.  2:  7. 

TiioMA.s  AtH'i^As  conceived  of  the  image  of  God  from  three  points 
of  view.  In  the  first  place  man  possesses  aptitudo  moralis  to  know 
and  love  God;  in  the  second  place  he  knows  and  loves  God,  although 
imperfectly,  which  is  imago  per  conformitatem  gratiae;  in  the  third 
place  man  loves  God  perfectly,  and  this  is  imago  secundem  simili- 
tudinem  gratiae.  In  the  first  place  the  image  is  natural,  in  the  other 
instances  it  is  a  supernatural  gift  of  grace.  He  says  that  donum 
superadditum  was  bestowed  upon  man  at  his  creation  and  designed 
to  serve  as  a  rein  on  nature.  Alexander  of  Hales,  Boxaventura. 
Duns  Scotus  and  others  maintained  that  donum  superadditum  was 
given  after  creation.  Bellarmin  also  asserts  that  this  gift  did  not 
belong  to  the  nature  of  man,  but  was  bestowed  upon  him  later. 

Luther  taught  that  the  image  of  God  consisted  in  a  pure  will,  true 
knowledge  and  peace  in  God.  He  distinguished  between  imago  Dei 
and  similitudo  Dei,  but  rejected  the  teaching  of  the  Scholastics.  The 
tree  of  life  bestowed  health  and  the  strength  of  youth  on  Adam,  who 
would  be  transformed  without  the  intervention  of  death.  Calovius, 
Quenstedt  and  Hollazius  look  upon  immortality  as  a  natural  attribute. 
BuDDEUs  derives  it  from  the  tree  of  life.  The  Socinians  conceive  of 
the  image  of  God  principally  as  dominion  over  nature  and  the  animal 
creation.  Woman  is  excluded  from  participation  in  this  dominion. 
The  Arminians  also  state  that  the  image  consisted  in  the  dominion 
over  the  animal  creation.  Men  were  like  good  children  and  their 
goodness  came  from  natural  instinct. 

The  Rationalists  declared  that  the  image  of  God  consisted  in  in- 
clination toward  good  and  that  the  difference  between  now  and  then 
is  simply  relative.  Sciileieu.macher  said  that  the  original  perfection 
consisted  in  the  possibility  of  uninterrupted  consciousness  of  God  in 
the  soul.  He  rejects  the  expression  "image  of  God,"  because,  he  de- 
clared, there  existed  no  perfect  correspondence.  Neither  did  he  con- 
sider "justitia  originalis"  a  proper  expression,  inasmuch  as  man  has 
not  reached  independence  through  development.  Thomasius  and 
PiiiLiiTi  advocated  the  orthodox  view,  but  stressed  the  principle  of 
development. 


THE  FALL   AJND  ORIGINAL   SIN.  161 

§13.     THE  FALL  AND  ORIGINAL  SIN. 

We  begin  herewith  the  study  of  hamartology  or  the  doc- 
trine of  sin.  The  existence  of  sin  presupposes  the  Fall, 
inasmuch  as  man  was  originally  in  a  state  of  relative  per- 
fection or  status  integritatis.  Now  he  finds  himself  in 
status  corruptionis.  By  this  is  meant  that  state  of  corrup- 
tion into  which  man  was  plunged  when  of  his  own  free  will 
he  became  disobedient  toward  God  and  transgressed  the  law 
of  Paradise.  The  possibility  of  the  first  sin  becomes  evi- 
dent when  we  consider  the  implications  in  the  concept  of 
freedom.  No  real  reason  has  been  presented  to  prove  the 
historical  recital  of  the  Fall,  as  found  in  Gen.  3,  an  allegory. 
We  may  be  sure  that  the  story  of  the  Fall  is  a  literal  recital 
of  the  actual  historical  truth. 

1.    The  Origin  of  Sin. 

God  is  not  the  author  of  sin.  Quenstedt  says:  "God  is 
not  the  cause  of  sin:  1)  in  a  physical  sense,  because  in  such 
a  sense  sin  or  evil  has  no  cause;  2)  in  a  moral  sense,  by 
commanding,  persuading,  or  approving,  because  He  does 
not  desire  sin,  but  hates  it ;  3)  by  way  of  accident,  inasmuch 
as  nothing  can  happen  to  God  by  chance  or  fortuitously." 
The  causes  were  as  follows:  a)  causa  externa  et  principalis 
remotior  was  Satan;  b)  causa  insUnmientalis  was  the  ser- 
pent, possessed  by  Satan ;  c)  causa  interna,  directa  et  pro- 
pinqua  was  man's  abuse  of  the  understanding  and  the  free 
will. 

We  can  formulate  a  conception  of  the  origin  of  sin  by 
the  consideration  of  the  principle  of  freedom.  There  are 
many  that  have  asked  the  question  why  God,  who  is 
omniscient,  should  have  created  man  such  that  he  could 
fall  into  sin.  Those  who  propound  such  a  question,  how- 
ever, forget  that  man  would  not  have  been  a  man,  but 
an  irrational  animal,  if  he  had  been  created  without  self- 
consciousness,  self-determination,  or  freedom.  According 
to  the  principle  of  freedom  a  mechanical  determinism  could 


1G2  ANTHROPOLOGY. 

not  be  brought  into  play.  The  freedom  of  man  as  to  its 
content  must  needs  be  realized  by  way  of  choice.  A  test 
was  therefore  necessary.  The  will  of  God  was  therein 
revealed  in  a  manner  that  cannot  be  considered  too  stern, 
inasmuch  as  the  test  that  ensued  is  expressed  in  the  fol- 
lowing words  of  the  Lord:  "Of  the  tree  of  the  knowledge 
of  good  and  evil,  thou  shalt  not  eat  of  it."  This  was  a 
reasonable  demand,  but  a  strong  enough  challenge  to  bring 
into  play  the  principle  of  self-determination  on  the  part  of 
man,  so  that  he  could  determine  for  himself  what  he  would 
do.  It  may  be  considered  at  once  a  piece  of  good  and  evil 
fortune,  if  we  may  so  express  ourselves,  that  the  temptation 
to  sin  came  from  Satan,  i.  e.,  from  without,  because  if  man 
had  fallen  into  sin  without  an  external  temptation,  then  his 
fall  would  have  been  like  unto  that  of  the  evil  angels.  To 
be  sure,  it  was  a  great  misfortune  that  Satan  tempted  men, 
but  there  is  no  excuse  for  man  on  that  ground,  inasmuch 
as  man  possessed  power  to  overcome  temptation.  He  had 
an  enlightened  understanding,  so  that  the  temptation  should 
have  been  perfectly  transparent.  Of  his  own  free  will  the 
egoism  of  man  became  dominant,  so  that  his  own  will  in- 
stead of  the  will  of  God  became  the  decisive  element  of  his 
self-determination.  The  essence  of  sin,  therefore,  is  selfish- 
ness. Man  would  become  like  unto  God.  He  was  made  in 
the  image  of  (^od,  but  became  perverted  through  the  asser- 
tion of  rebellious  independence.  Viewed  from  the  stand- 
point of  man,  the  Lord  said  after  the  Fall:  ''Behold,  the 
man  is  become  as  one  of  us,  to  know  good  and  evil."  There 
was  holy  irony  or  at  least  a  terrifying  truth  expressed  in 
this  assertion  of  the  Lord,  inasmuch  as  man  had  gotten 
knowledge  of  evil  in  a  wrong  way  that  led  to  eternal  death. 
If  man  in  his  self-determination  had  chosen  the  will  of  God 
he  would  have  learned  to  know  of  evil  in  a  detached  way. 
while  now  by  reason  of  the  Fall  he  knew  what  was  good 
only  in  a  detached  way  as  a  reminiscence  of  the  period  when 
he  stood  in  blessed  communion  with  God. 

Various  theories  have  been  propounded  to  explain  the 
origin  of  sin.     The  following  must  be  rejected:    1)    The 


THE  FALL  AND  ORIGINAL   SIN.  163 

theory  of  privation  or  imperfection,  according  to  which  the 
source  of  sin  is  to  be  found  in  finiteness  and  sin  is  considered 
only  an  imperfection,  just  as  a  person  loses  a  limb  or  suffers 
from  some  defect,  physical  or  moral.  The  positive  element 
of  sin  is  ignored  in  this  theory;  2)  the  Sensualistic  theory, 
according  to  which  the  source  of  evil  is  to  be  found  in  the 
body.  This  theory  is  related  to  the  Manichaean  Dualism. 
In  recent  times  a  modification  of  this  theory  has  been  pre- 
sented to  the  eff'ect  that  inasmuch  as  the  sensuous  in  man 
is  first  to  be  developed,  therefore  sin  arises  as  the  sensuous 
outbalances  the  influence  of  the  spiritual;  3)  the  Pantheistic 
theory,  which  declares  that  the  evil  is  necessary  as  a  process 
in  the  development  of  the  spirit.  The  good  stands  in  need 
of  the  evil,  since  all  life  is  developed  through  contraries ; 

4)  the  Calvinistic  theory,  which  asserts  that  God  has  pre- 
determined sin  and  therefore  also  decided'  upon  the  Fall; 

5)  the  Rationalistic  theory,  which  denies  the  Fall.  Man 
still  possesses  his  original  freedom,  and  sin  arises  through 
the  exercise  of  his  free. will.  Sin  is  general  by  reason  of 
bad  example  and  habits;  6)  the  old  and  modern  Negative 
theory,  which  teaches  that  sin  does  not  exist  and  is  only  an 
imagination  of  the  mind.  The  so-called  "Christian  Science" 
holds  this  view. 

2.    Concerning  Original  Sin  and  its  Definition. 

HoLLAZius  defines  original  sin  as  follows:*  "Original 
(or  hereditary)  sin  is  that  corruption  of  human  nature  by 
evil  desire  which  deprived  man  of  his  original  righteousness 
through  the  Fall  of  our  first  parents  and  tvhich  is  trans- 
planted in  all  men  by  natural  generation,  rendering  them 
indisposed  to  spiritual  good  and  inclined  to  evil  and  making 
them  subject  to  the  tvrath  of  flod  and  eternal  damnation." 
Original  sin  may  therefore  be  said  to  consist  of  two  and 

*  HoLLAZius :  "Peccatum  originale  est  privatio  justitise  originalis 
cum  prava  inclinatione  conjuncta,  totam  humanam  naturam  corrum- 
pens,  ex  lapsu  primorum  parentum  derivata  et  per  carnalem  genera- 
tionem  in  omnes  homines  propagata,  ipsos  ineptos  ad  bona  spiritualia, 
ad  mala  vero  propensos  reddens  reosque  faciens  irse  divinae  et  aeternse 
damnationis." 


164  ANTHROPOLOGY. 

to  imply  three  elements:  1)  the  negative,  or  the  loss  of  the 
material  image  of  God,  2)  the  positive,  or  the  evil  desire, 
concupiscentia  prava,  which  is  real  sin,  3)  imputatio  ad 
reatum  et  poenam,  or,  as  it  is  also  expressed,  reatus  culpse 
and  reatus  poenae. 

In  the  confessional  writings  the  following  metaphorical 
terms  are  used:  1)  vitiiim,  corresponding  to  the  negative 
element,  the  word  meaning  fault  or  deformity,  such  as 
blindness  or  lameness,  and  therefore  a  permanent  defect ; 
2)  morbus,  corresponding  to  the  positive  element,  meaning 
a  sickness  that  extends  throughout  the  whole  body,  a  con- 
tagious disease,  such  as  fever;  or,  changing  the  figure,  sin 
is  said  to  permeate  man's  nature  as  the  heat  penetrates  the 
iron  in  the  crucible;  3)  seuche  (Latin,  lues),  which  is  dif- 
ferent from  both  vitium  and  morbus.  The  relation  between 
this  word  and  sickness  and  pest  is  the  same  as  the  relation 
between  genus  and  species. 

Original  sin  is  also  designated  by  the  following  terms: 

1)  peccatum  originate  originan^,  or  the  first  sin  of  our  race; 

2)  peccatum  originale  originatum,  or  the  depravity  that 
is  transplanted  to  the  whole  race  in  consequence  of  the  first 
sin. 

Sin  is  called  peccatum  originale,  in  the  first  place,  because 
it  originated  with  Adam,  in  the  second  place,  because  every 
man  is  born  with  it,  in  the  third,  because  it  is  the  root  of 
all  sins. 

Concerning  the  sinfulness  of  original  sin  Dr.  C.  P. 
Krauth  in  The  Conservative  Reformation  (pp.  398-406) 
argues  that  it  is  truly  sin,  because:  1)  it  has  the  relations 
and  connections  of  sin;  2)  it  has  the  names  and  synonyms 
of  sin;  3)  it  has  the  essence  of  sin;  4)  it  has  the  attributes 
of  sin;  5)  it  does  the  acts  of  sin;  6)  it  incurs  the  penalties 
of  sin;  7)  it  needs  the  remedies  of  sin. 

The  following  Scripture  passages  may  be  cited :  "Behold, 
I  was  brought  forth  in  iniquity  and  in  sin  did  my  mother 
conceive  me"  (Ps.  51 :  5)  ;  "As  through  one  man  sin  entered 
the  world"  (Rom.  5:  12)  ;  "That  which  is  born  of  the  flesh 
is  flesh"  (John  3:6);  "He  begat  a  son  in  his  own  likeness. 


THE   FALL  AND  ORIGINAL.   SIN.  165 

after  his  image"  (Gen.  5:3);  "Every  imagination  of  the 
thoughts  of  his  heart  was  only  evil  continually"  (Gen.  6:5); 
"By  nature  children  of  wrath"  (Eph.  2:3).  The  selfishness 
of  sin  is  set  forth  both  directly  and  indirectly,  as  in  the 
following  passage:  'That  they  that  live  should  no  longer 
live  unto  themselves"  (2  Cor.  5:  15)  ;  compare  also  Gal.  2: 
20;  Phil.  2:4;  Luke  14:  26;  John  12:  25.  With  regard  to 
the  attributes,  the  acts  and  the  consequences  of  sin  the  fol- 
lowing passages  may  be  observed:  "What  is  man,  that  he 
should  be  righteous?"  (Job  15:  14)  ;  "For  out  of  the  heart 
come  forth  evil  thoughts,"  etc.  (Matt.  15:  14)  ;  cf.  (iai.  5: 
19—21;  "Sin  which  dwelleth  in  me"  (Rom.  7:  20)  ;  "I  see 
a  different  law  in  my  members"  (Rom.  7:  23)  ;  "The  judg- 
ment came  of  one  unto  condemnation"  (Rom.  5:  16)  ;  "Cre- 
ate in  me  a  clean  heart,  0  God"  (Ps.  51:  12)  ;  "In  the  put- 
ting  off  of  the  body  of  the  flesh,  in  the  circumcision  of 
Christ"  (Col.  2:  11)  ;  "Who  shall  deliver  me  out  of  the  body 
of  this  death?"  (Rom.  7:  24)  ;  "Except  one  be  born  of  water 
and  the  Spirit,  he  cannot  enter  into  the  kingdom  of  God" 
(John  3:5). 

3.    Characteristics  or  Affectiones. 

These  are:  1)  iiaturalis  inhserentia,  because  original  sin 
belongs  to  the  depraved  nature  of  man.  In  the  original 
state  of  man  sin  was  unnatural.  Against  Flacius,  who 
declared  that  original  sin  constituted  the  essence  of  man, 
the  following  terms  are  used,  non  essentiale,  sed  accidentale, 
because  original  sin  is  a  quality  in  the  essence  of  'man ; 
2)  naturalis  projjagabilitas,  because  original  sin  is  propa- 
gated through  natural  birth;  3)  generale,  or  general,  a  term 
used  against  the  Roman  Catholic  Church,  which  teaches  the 
immaculate  conception  of  Mary.  Therefore  all  men  are 
subjectum  quod;  4)  duratio  per  oynnem  vitam,  because 
original  sin  is  never  rooted  out  in  this  life.  The  reatus 
or  the  imputation  of  sin  ceases  in  regeneration  whose  Sac- 
rament is  Baptism,  but  the  materiale  remains.  The  domi- 
nation of  sin  is  done  away  with  through  sanctification,  and 
in  death,  finally,  so  far  as  the  children  of  God  are  concerned, 


166  ANTIIKOPOLOGY. 

sin  itself  is  totally  obliterated  in  a  manner  past  finding  out; 
5)  damnabile  or  damnable.  This  is  true  because  peccatum 
originale  originatum  is  vere  peccatum.  Original  sin  con- 
demns all  that  are  not  regenerated  through  Baptism  and 
the  Holy  Ghost. 

4.    iMPUTATio  OR  Imputation. 

Imputation  is  presented  in  a  threefold  manner:  1)  im- 
putatio  immediata,  or  immediate  imputation.  Adam  is  re- 
garded as  the  representative  and  the  moral  head  (caput 
morale)  of  the  human  race.  Therefore  all  men  sinned  in 
him.  The  children  of  men,  who  constitute  one  race,  cannot 
be  separated  from  each  other;  2)  impiitatio  mediata,  or  the 
mediate  imputation,  which  is  based  upon  the  fact  that  Adam 
is  the  natural  head  of  the  race  or  caput  naturale.  Compare 
Traducianism,  Section  II,  4;  3)  imputatio  individ iicdis,  or 
the  individual  imputation,  because  with  the  development  of 
self-consciousness  each  person  appropriates  original  sin  as 
his  own  through  actual  sin. 

Original  sin  is  something  that  is  imputed,  not  only  be- 
cause of  the  transgression  of  another,  which  view  tends 
toward  Pelagianism,  but  because  original  sin  implies  the 
corruption  of  our  nature.  The  sinful  state  stands  in  rela- 
tion to  the  sin  of  Adam  because  he  is  the  principium  natu- 
rale et  morale  of  the  whole  race.  Original  sin  is  therefore 
guilt  or  reatus  propter  inobedientiam  Adse  et  Hevae.  For 
this  reason  the  confessional  writings  state  that  on  account 
of  this  corruption  and  the  disobedience  of  our  first  parents 
the  nature  of  man  is  accused  and  judged  by  the  law  of  God. 

Inasmuch,  therefore,  as  not  only  grown  persons,  but  also 
small  children  who  have  not  committed  actual  sins,  come 
under  the  judgment  of  the  sin  of  our  first  parents,  it  would 
seem  as  though  the  small  children,  not  to  speak  of  grov^m 
persons,  would  thereby  suffer  unjustly  and  without  cause. 
However,  we  must  not  forget  that  Adam  was  the  repre- 
sentative of  the  race  and  as  such  must  be  tested  for  the 
race.  Inasmuch  as  he  failed  in  the  test,  therefore  all  must 
suffer  by  reason  of  the  solidarity  of  the  race.     If  men  had 


THE   FALL   AND  ORIGINAL   SIN.  167 

not  constituted  a  racial  solidarity,  they  would  have  been 
like  unto  the  angels  and  each  would  have  stood  his  own  test, 
but  in  His  wisdom  (iod  created  man  to  form  an  organism. 
Despite  the  fact  that  sin  has  come  into  the  world  through 
one  man,  still  men  are  not  compelled  to  remain  in  the  state 
of  sin.  The  compensation  which  has  been  gained  through 
the  Second  Adam  is  greater  than  the  original  loss  sustained, 
and  through  another  test  man  may  become  finally  liberated 
from  original  sin,  provided  he  make  use  of  the  means  of 
salvation.  Thus  Paul  writes  in  Romans  5 :  14,  15 :  ''Never- 
theless death  reigned  from  Adam  until  Moses,  even  over 
them  that  had  not  sinned  after  the  likeness  of  Adam's  trans- 
gression, who  is  a  figure  of  him  that  was  to  come.  But  not 
as  the  trespass,  so  also  is  the  free  gift.  For  if  by  the  tres- 
pass of  the  one  the  many  died,  much  more  did  the  grace  of 
God,  and  the  gift  by  the  grace  of  the  one  man,  Jesus  Christ, 
abound  unto  many."  The  act  of  the  second  Adam  is  meant 
for  the  whole  race  of  men  without  merit  and  without  dis- 
tinction. Therefore  the  way  to  Paradise  is  open  to  all,  al- 
though a  test  is  necessary  for  all,  since  God  does  not  force 
anyone  to  return. 

5.    The  Effects  of  Original  Sin  or  Effectus. 

The  effects  of  sin  are  the  following:  1)  The  loss  of  the 
free  will;  2)  actual  sins;  3)  spiritual  death;  4)  sickness 
and  suffering;  5)  bodily  death;  6)  eternal  or  the  second 
death. 

The  loss  of  the  free  will  is  naturally  included  in  the  nega- 
tive element  of  sin,  inasmuch  as  man  lost  perfectiones  prin- 
cipales  or  justitia  originalis.  Spiritual  death  or  separation 
from  God  is  also  included  under  this  head.  Although 
original  sin  in  a  special  sense  destroyed  the  spiritual  powers 
of  man,  still  the  effects  necessarily  also  were  extended  to 
his  physical  nature  so  that  perfectiones  minus  principales 
were  likewise  lost.  Bodily  death  became  the  necessary  re- 
sult of  spiritual  death.  Death  did  not  belong  to  the  nature 
of  man  and  even  now  is  something  unnatural.     Provided 


168  ANTHKOl'OLOGY. 

man  had  remained  in  the  state  of  integrity,  he  would  have 
escaped  death  and  when  fully  developed  for  the  higher  life 
would  have  been  transformed  in  nature  and  translated  to 
heaven.  But  by  reason  of  sin,  not  only  did  physical  death 
as  a  king  of  terror  enter  into  the  world,  but  what  is  still 
worse,  eternal  death  or  the  second  death  also  entered. 

The  following  Scripture  passages  may  be  cited  to  show 
the  effects  of  original  sin :  "I  am  carnal,  sold  under  sin" 
(Rom.  7:  14)  ;  "Then  the  lust,  when  it  hath  conceived, 
beareth  sin :  and  the  sin,  when  it  is  fullgrown,  bringeth 
forth  death"  (James  1 :  15)  ;  "Dead  through  your  trespasses 
and  sins"  (Eph.  2:1);  "The  wages  of  sin  is  death"  (Rom. 
6:  23)  ;  "In  the  day  that  thou  eatest  thereof  thou  shalt 
surely  die"  (Gen.  2:  17)  ;  "This  is  the  second  death,  even 
the  lake  of  fire"  (Rev.  20:  15). 

6.    Notes  on  the  History  of  Dogma. 

The  older  teachers  of  the  Church  considered  that  the 
depravity  of  sin  was  general,  but  their  opinions  did  not 
agree  on  the  heredity  of  sin  through  natural  propagation. 
This  in  turn  was  dependent  on  the  distinctive  opinions  with 
regard  to  the  propagation  of  the  soul.  The  Oriental  fathers 
seemed  to  identify  the  natural  imperfections  with  sensu- 
ality. The  Occidental  theologians  took  a  deeper  view  of  sin. 
Stress  was  laid  on  imputatio  immediata.  Augustine  re- 
garded sin  as  reatus,  and  the  principal  seat  of  sin  he  places 
in  the  sensual  nature  of  man.  The  teaching  of  the  Roman 
Catholic  Church  was  developed  during  the  Scholastic  period. 
According  to  this  doctrine  original  sin  is  something  nega- 
tive, a  loss  of  the  original  righteousness,  which,  however, 
was  only  a  bonum  superadditum,  through  the  loss  of  which 
man  merely  fell  back  into  the  state  of  puris  naturalibus. 
The  golden  rein  was  lost  and  to  that  extent  man  was  weak- 
ened. Original  sin  was  regarded  indeed  as  lust,  which  had 
its  seat  in  the  flesh,  but  it  was  not  real  sin.  Baptism  does 
away  with  the  reatus  of  the  Fall  and  therefore  also  with 
the  evil  of  hereditary  sin.     Luther  and  the  Church  that 


THE  FALL   AND  ORIGINAL   SIN.  169 

bears  his  name  teach  clearly  that  all  men  are  born  in  sin, 
without  religion,  without  trust  in  God,  and  with  evil  desires. 
Original  sin  is  real  sin  and  condemns  all  that  are  not  re- 
generated through  Baptism  and  the  Holy  Ghost.  On  the 
other  hand,  ZwiNGLi  leaned  toward  the  Roman  view,  while 
the  teaching  of  Calvin  stood  in  alignment  with  his  doc- 
trine of  predestination.  The  Formula  of  Concord  empha- 
sized the  doctrine  that  had  been  expressed  in  the  Augsburg 
Confession.  During  the  modern  critical  period  the  theories 
of  privation  and  sensualism  have  been  advocated  besides 
that  of  Rationalism.  The  idealistic  philosophy  naturally 
rejects  the  Church's  doctrine  of  original  sin.  In  accordance 
with  the  tenets  of  this  philosophy  sin  was  necessary  and 
beneficial.  Schleiermacher  and  Julius  Miiller  speak  of  an 
original  sinfulness.  But  the  orthodox  Lutheran  Theo- 
logians have  firmly  set  forth  the  teachings  of  the  Church. 
In  recent  times  Ritschlianism  has  sought  to  undermine  the 
orthodox  doctrine  of  sin,  but  many  voices  have  been  raised 
against  this  destructive  theology. 

Justin  Martyk  considered  that  the  Fall  consisted  in  disobedience  and 
superstitious  credulity,  but  he  does  not  clearly  present  the  doctrine  of 
original  sin.  Every  man  deserves  death  t^iat  chooses  to  do  evil  and 
walk  in  the  footsteps  of  Adam.  Tatian*  said  that  before  the  Pall  man 
possessed  a  material  soul 'and  a  spirit,  but  that  the  spirit  was  lost 
in  the  Fall  and  in  consequence  man  became  mortal.  Iren.eus  taught 
that  the  human  race  had  sinned  in  Adam  and  become  guilty  before 
God,  while  it  fell  into  the  power  of  Satan.  Clement  of  Alexandria 
taught  that  sin  is  the  free  act  of  man  and  not  an  evil  inherited  from 
Adam.  Tertullian  said  that  the  essence  of  sin  was  selfishness.  The 
soul  is  transplanted  with  the  body  and  sin  through  heredity.  He  was 
the  first  to  set  forth  clearly  the  doctrine  of  original  sin  and  used  the 
expression  vitium  originis.  In  children  sin  is  found  as  to  its  material 
content,  but  not  in  a  formal  sense,  that  is,  there  is  no  guilt.  On  the 
other  hand,  Cyprian  said  that  children  have  inherited  guilt  from 
Adam.  Origen  did  not  believe  in  original  sin,  but  said  that  all  men 
were  born  in  sin,  basing  his  assertion  on  the  supposition  that  a  fall 
into  sin  had  taken  place  in  the  ante-temporal  state,  for  which  reason 
every  man  brought  sin  with  him  into  the  world. 

Lactantius  taught  that  sin  had  arisen  through  the  infirmities  of  the 
body,  but  that  we  had  inherited  death  from  Adam.  Athanasius 
ascribes  sin  to   inertia  or  slothfulness.     He  did  not  consider  the   sin 


170  ANTHROPOLOGY. 

of  Adam  as  really  being  the  cause  of  human  corruption.  Small  chil 
dren  are  guiltless.  There  were  sinless  men  before  Christ.  Cf.  Oratio 
III,  26,  33.  Basil  taught  that  freedom  was  the  root  of  sin.  It  was 
dependent  on  man  himself  as  to  whether  he  would  sin  or  not.  Cyril 
OF  Jerusalem  ascribed  sin  to  the  free  will  of  man  and  said  that  Satan 
leads  such  men  astray  as  would  be  led  astray.  Gregory  of  Nazianzu.s 
and  Gregory  of  Nyssa  conceived  of  sin  negatively.  Small  children 
are  guiltless.  A.mhrose  taught  that  we  all  sinned  in  Adam  and  that 
we  are  born  in  sin.  Pkl.\gius  maintained  that  man  was  indifferent. 
Adam  brought  injury  only  upon  himself  through  the  Fall  and  only 
through  his  example  has  he  brought  injury  upon  his  descendants. 
There  is  no  original  sin.  Lust  is  not  sin,  but  can  give  rise  to  it. 
Augustine  taught  that  in  Adam  all  men  sinned.  He  conceived  of  sin 
as  implying  a  negation  or  privatio  boni  in  contradistinction  to  the 
ManichcBans  who  set  forth  the  substantiality  of  sin  in  man.  He  pre- 
sented the  negative  and  positive  elements  in  sin,  but  concupiscentia 
was  not  sin  per  se.  According  to  his  view  original  sin  was  reatus  or 
the  imputation  of  the  sin  of  Adam,  for  which  reason  he  did  not  con- 
sider it  so  much  our  sin  as  rather  a  punishment  for  sin.  The  real 
scat  of  sin  is  to  be  found  in  the  sensuous  nature  of  man.  Gregory* 
THE  Great  set  forth  spiritual  death  as  the  punishment  for  sin,  because 
Adam  did  not  die  the  same  day  that  he  fell  into  sin.  Joiix  of  Damascus 
viewed  sin  more  from  the  negative  than  the  positive  standpoint. 

John  Scotus  Erigena  rejected  the  doctrine  of  original  sin  and  ac- 
cepted the  teaching  of  ante-temporal  sin.  As  a  Pantheist  he  considered 
sin  as  a  yu,^  6v  and  necessary  for  development.  Anselm  considered 
that  the  essence  of  sin  was  selfishness.  He  expressed  the  relationship 
between  Adam  and  his  posterity  in  the  following  language:  in  Adamo 
fecit  persona  peccatricem  naturam,  in  posteris  facit  natura  personas 
peccatrices.  Hugo  of  St.  Victor  taught  that  sin  had  arisen  through 
a  disparity  between  appetitus  justi  and  commodi,  both  of  which  are 
concreated  in  man.  Man  passed  beyond  or  exceeded  moderation  in 
the  Fall,  and  as  a  consequence  he  also  lost  moderation  in  seeking  the 
lower  good.  He  lost  appetitus  justi  and  justitia.  Original  sin  was 
principally  privatio  boni.  Abelard  detracted  from  the  significance  of 
the  Fall,  making  sin  dependent  on  intention.  Strictly  speaking,  there- 
fore, small  children  have  no  sin.  He  laid  stress  on  the  punishment 
of  sin.  Peter  Lo.mhard  said  that  sin,  fomes  pcccati,  was  mediated 
through  lust  at  the  time  of  conception.  The  souls  were  then  created 
immediately  by  God,  but  contaminated  by  contact  with  the  body.  He 
taught,  however,  that  all  men  sinned  in  Adam,  but  viewed  sin  prin- 
cipally from  the  negative  standpoint  or  the  loss  of  the  primitive  good- 
ness. Thomas  Aquinas  declared  that  the  bonum  superadditum  was 
lost  in  the  Fall,  by  which  there  resulted  a  disorder  in  the  powers  of 
the  soul,  a  vulneratio  natura?      Materialiter,  sin  consisted  in  concupi- 


THE  FALL   AND  ORIGINAL   SIN.  171 

scentia,  which  in  itself  was  not  sinful.  He  viewed  the  human  race  as 
a  living  body  and  held  that  original  sin  brings  guilt  to  all.  The  souls 
of  men  are  created  by  God  as  included  in  the  Fall  of  Adam.  Duns 
ScoTUS  did  not  consider  that  any  great  damage  had  been  wrought 
through  the  Fall,  because  it  was  only  the  bonum  superadditum  that 
had  been  lost,  which  had  been  given  after  creation.  Still,  concupi- 
scentia,  which  in  itself  was  no  sin,  thereby  lost  its  rein.  He  advo- 
cated the  doctrine  of  the  immaculate  conception  of  the  Virgin  Mary 
DuRANDUs  OF  St.  Pourcain  Said  that  guilt  was  inherited  from  Adam, 
but  not  sinful  corruption.  Bellarmin  taught  that  there  is  no  other 
difference  between  man  before  and  after  the  Fall  than  that  man  has 
lost  the  supernatural  gift  of  grace  and  now  is  in  a  state  of  purls 
naturalibus.     The  guilt  of  Adam,  however,  is  imputed  to  all  men. 

LvTHER  experienced  a  deep  sense  of  sin  and  laid  stress  on  both  th2 
positive  and  negative  elements  in  sin.  He  compares  original  sin  to 
the  leaven  of  Satan  which  has  poisoned  the  whole  of  our  nature.  On 
the  other  hand,  Zwingli  had  a  superficial  sense  of  sin,  considering  it 
simply  as  a  sickness.  The  hereditary  damage  is  neither  sin  nor  guilt. 
He  does  not  acknowledge  the  imputation  expressed  in  the  term  im- 
putatio  mediata.  Flacius  taught  that  original  sin  constitutes  the 
nature  and  essence  of  man.  Striegel,  on  the  other  hand,  in  his  argu- 
ment against  the  term  "substance,"  lays  stress  in  an  ambiguous  way 
on  the  accidental  element  in  sin.  Flacius  declared  against  him  that 
if  sin  be  accidental,  original  sin  would  simply  be  an  external  thing. 
At  least,  Striegel  used  a  very  peculiar  expression,  although  neither  he 
nor  Flacius  understood  the  effects  of  their  terminology  and  explana- 
tions. Striegel  made  use  of  the  figure  of  the  juice  of  garlic,  which, 
when  spread  on  a  magnet,  nullifies  the  magnetism.  According  to  this 
figure  sin  would  become  an  external  and  accidental  thing  merely,  a 
privatio  or  imperfection.  The  Formula  of  Concord  uses  still  stronger 
expressions  than  the  preceding  Lutheran  symbols.  Original  sin  is 
set  forth  as  peccatum  and  worthy  of  condemnation,  even  though  no 
actual  sin  had  followed.  Emphasis  is  laid  on  the  fact  that  the  sinful 
state  is  man's  very  own.  It  is,  however,  connected  with  the  sin  of 
Adam,  because  he  is  principium  naturale  et  morale.  Imputatio  me- 
diata is  set  forth.  The  formale  of  original  sin  is  guilt.  The  materiale 
of  sin  in  the  negative  sense  is  the  loss  of  man's  original  righteousness, 
so  that  in  a  material  sense  he  lacks  the  image  of  God;  in  a  positive 
sense  the  materiale  of  sin  is  set  forth  as  concupiscentia  with  its  seat 
especially  in  the  spiritual  nature  of  man.  In  the  antithetical  portion 
Pelagianism  and  related  theories  are  condemned.  The  Formula  fur- 
ther condemns  the  theory  that  original  sin  is  merely  a  spot  or  stain 
in  human  nature  and  not  a  corruption.  The  contention  of  Striegel 
is  rejected,  in  which  he  declared  that  through  original  sin  nature  was 
deprived  of  the  use  of  its  powers  as  the  magnet  is  demagnetized  by 


172  AXTHROrOLOGY. 

the  application  of  garlic  juice.  The  teachings  of  Flacius  were  also 
rejected.  The  Sovinians  reject  the  doctrine  of  original  sin  and  its 
imputation.  The  sin  of  Adam  was  the  cause  of  physical-  death.  Man 
was,  indeed,  mortal  by  nature,  but  God  had  granted  unto  him  im- 
mortality. Men  are  indeed  weak,  but  this  is  to  be  ascribed  to  the 
influence,  the  evil  habits  and  examples  of  their  ancestors.  The 
Arminians  also  reject  original  sin  and  call  it  merely  a  weakness. 
Justitia  originalis  was  lost,  so  that  the  grace  of  God  is  necessary  for 
salvation.  They  also  teach  that  physical  death  came  as  a  result  of 
the  sin  of  Adam.  The  lusts  of  men  are  not  sinful,  provided  they  are 
natural  and  have  not  arisen  through  some  evil  habit. 

Leibnitz  says  that  sin  is  a  lesser  degree  of  good,  as  the  cold  is  a 
lesser  degree  of  heat.  The  Rationalists,  such  as  Wegscheider.  reject 
the  doctrine  of  original  sin,  stating  that  it  does  not  accord  with  the 
attributes  of  God  that  He  should  permit  the  whole  of  human  nature 
to  be  corrupted  through  the  si-n  of  one  man.  He  says,  furthermore, 
that  the  doctrine  is  inexplicable.  Kant  stated  that  the  Fall  consisted 
in  man's  liberation  from  the  domination  of  instinct  and  transition  to 
that  of  the  intellect.  Adam  was  man  in  general.  The  root  of  sin  was 
to  be  found  in  the  evil  tendency  which  he  called  the  radical  evil.  This 
arose  in  the  ante-temporal  period.  He  is  the  author  of  the  rationalistic 
theory  of  sensualism.  Man  arranged  the  determining  factors  of  the 
practical  reason  in  accordance  with  the  sensuous  appetites.  Hegel 
considered  the  paradisaical  state  the  same  as  the  animal  state,  but 
through  the  Pall  man  became  true  man.  Evil  is  necessary  for  progress. 
The  Hegelian  theologians  considered  that  sin  was  necessary.  The 
Supranaturalists  teach  that  man  participates  in  the  guilt  and  punish- 
ment of  Adam,  but  no  one  is  condemned  because  of  original  sin.  Man 
is  condemned,  if,  in  self-determination,  he  sins  as  Adam  sinned. 
Schleiermaciier  acknowledges  the  universality  of  sin,  but  denies  its 
heredity  from  Adam.  Human  nature  was  sinful  from  the  beginning. 
Sin  is  an  element  in  progress.  In  relation  to  God  sin  possesses  no 
objective  reality;  it  exists  in  our  subjective  consciousness.  With  his 
Pantheism  he  combines  the  theories  of  privation  and  the  sensual. 
Julius  Muller  believes  that  every  man  has  had  an  ante-temporal  ex- 
istence, when  his  will  was  turned  against  the  will  of  God.  Martenskx 
considered  original  sin  as  an  evil  fate.  Only  on  becoming  personal 
does  racial  sin  imply  guilt.  Ritschl  denies  that  original  sin  is  evil 
desire  (concupiscence).  He  considers  original  sin  simply  as  the  fate- 
ful  influence   which   evil   continually  exerts  upon   man 


ACTUAL   SIN.  173 

'§14.    ACTUAL  SIN. 

Original  sin,  peccatum  originale  or  prava  concupiscentia, 
is  the  ground  and  source  of  peccata  actualia  or  actual  sins. 
As  man  progresses  morally  there  are  to  be  found  in  his 
development  two  conditions,  one  called  habitus,  or  the  set- 
tled state,  the  other,  actus,  or  the  free-will  action.  Habitus 
is  dependent  on  natural  character  and  repeated  acts  of  the 
will,  while  actus  implies  a  distinct  act  of  the  will  in  each 
separate  action.  Both  of  these  elements  must  be  empha- 
sized, because  if  the  former  alone  is  emphasized,  the  result 
will  be  determinism,  while  if  the  latter  is  emphasized  to 
the  exclusion  of  the  former,  the  result  will  be  a  rationalistic 
interpretation  of  the  origin  of  sin. 

Man  is  therefore  in  a  state  of  corruption  to  which  he 
conforms  more  and  more  through  sinful  actions  which  are 
fostered  in  this  state.  Status  corruptionis  is  characterized 
by  various  states,  dependent  on  the  moral  development  of 
man.  These  states  are  the  following:  1)  status  securitatis, 
or  the  state  of  sinful  security;  2)  status  ser'vitutis,  or  the 
state  of  bondage;  8)  status  hypocriseos  et  phariseismi,  or 
the  state  of  hypocrisy  or  Pharisaism ;  4)  status  indurationis, 
or  the  obdurate  state. 

1.    The  Characterization  of  Actual  Sin. 

The  essence  of  sin  is  selfishness  or  self-will.  It  must  be 
borne  in  mind,  however,  that  although  sin  is  a  matter  of 
the  will  and  therefore  voluntarium  subjective,  still  it  cannot 
be  said  that  sin  is  voluntarium  effective,  inasmuch  as  sin 
does  not  originate  in  the  free  assent  of  the  will,  as  the 
Roman  Catholics,  the  Socinians  and  others  teach.  We  must 
always  bear  in  mind  the  sinful  nature  of  original  sin  or  the 
state  of  man. 

The  most  general  definition  of  sin  is  the  following:  Sin 
is  every  departure,  in  thought,  ivord  and  deed,  from  the 
Law  of  God.  But  what  distinction  is  there  between  actual 
and  habitual  sins?  Some  say  that  actual  sin  is  an  act  of 
the  will  and  stands  under  the  domination  of  the  will,  while 


174  ANTHROPOLOGY. 

habitual  sin  dominates  the  will.  AgairTst  this  it  may  be 
urged  that  Christians  may  commit  actual  sins  that  are 
involuntaria.  Actual  sin  is  momentary,  while  habitual  sin 
is  dependent  on  the  permanent  bent  of  the  will. 

The  cause  of  sin  is  naturally  the  person  who  sins,  tempted 
by  his  own  flesh,  the  world  and  the  devil.  God  is  in  no 
sense  the  cause  of  actual  sin,  just  as  He  was  not  the  cause 
of  original  sin.  Some  have  declared  that  He  is  the  cause 
of  the  sin  of  obduracy.  This  view  is  based  on  the  following 
passage:  "Whom  he  will  he  hardeneth"  (Rom.  9:  18).  This 
passage  implies  only  an  act  of  divine  judgment  upon  an 
alreadj^  existent  state  of  sin,  God  punishes  sin  with  sin. 
HOLLAZius  defines  the  sin  of  obduracy  as  follows:  "God 
does  not  harden  men  causally  or  actively,  by  producing 
hardness  of  heart,  but  judicially  (judicialiter) ,  permissively 
(permissive),  and  by  forsaking  them  (desertive).  For  the 
act  of  hardening  is  a  judicial  act  by  which,  on  account  of 
antecedent,  voluntary,  and  inevitable  wickedness,  God  justly 
permits  a  man,  habitually  wicked,  to  rush  into  greater 
crimes,  and  withdraws  His  grace  from  him,  and  finally 
delivers  him  up  to  the  power  of  Satan,  by  whom  he  is  after- 
wards driven  into  greater  sins,  until  He  finally  cuts  him 
off  from  the  right  of  the  heavenly  inheritance." 

Concerning  suhjectum  quo  it  may  be  observed:  1)  that 
primaria  sedes  is  the  spirit  of  man  with  his  attributes, 
faculties  or  endowments,  intellect,  will  and  emotion;  2) 
secundaria  sedes  is  the  body  or  the  physical  nature  of  m.an. 

In  the  Word  of  God  sin  is  regarded  from  different  points 
of  view.  When  sin  is  looked  upon  as  a  failing  to  hit  the 
mark,  or  to  reach  the  right  goal,  the  word  ufJupTLu  is  used. 
Concupiscence,  or  the  positive  side  of  sin,  is  called  i-mOvfjiM. 
The  difference  between  åfJuipTrjfj-a  and  aixaprU  is  that  the  latter 
term  sets  forth  sin  in  both  the  abstract  and  concrete  sense, 
while  the  former  has  reference  to  the  specific  deed  as  dis- 
obedience toward  the  Law  of  God.  Compare  Mark  3:  28; 
Rom.  3:  25;  1  Cor.  6:  18.  Considered  as  ungodliness  sin 
is  called  do-c/Saa.  The  expression  TripiKorj  means  unwilling- 
ness to  hear,  with  disobedience  as  a  result.     Lawlessness 


ACTITAI.   SIN.  175 

and  transgression  of  the  Law  are  expressed  by  åvofJML  and 
7rapa/3ao-t9 .  When  shi  is  considered  as  a  fault,  an  insufficient 
abihty  to  judge,  a  deviation  from  truth  or  higher  moral 
standpoint,  then  TrapäiTTOijxa  is  used.  As  implying  ignorance 
sin  is  called  ayvoT^/ta.  When  forgetfulness  of  duty  or  imper- 
fection is  implied,  rjTTTjfxa.  is  used.  Cf.  1  Cor.  6 :  7.  nAr//u,/A£Aeta 
is  often  used  in  the  Old  Testament  to  express  discord.  The 
word  o-Api  is  used  with  a  variety  of  meanings,  but  most 
generally  with  a  strongly  ethical  significance. 

2.    Classification  of  Actual  Sins. 

Actual  sin  has  been  classified  in  the  following  way:  1) 
ratione  causae  or  culpx,  or  in  respect  of  the  defective  cause: 
a)  voluntaria  or  intentional;  b)  involuntaria  or  uninten- 
tional, to  which  are  counted  peccata  ignorantise,  prsecipi- 
tantias  et  infirmitatis,  or  sins  committed  through  ignorance, 
rashness  and  infirmity.  "And  that  servant,  who  knew  his 
Lord's  will,  and  made  not  ready,  nor  did  according  to  his 
will,  shall  be  beaten  with  many  stripes;  but  he  that  knew 
not,  and  did  things  worthy  of  stripes,  shall  be  beaten  with 
few  stripes"  (Luke  12:  47,  48)  ;  the  denial  of  Peter  (Matt. 
26:  70)  ;  "And  there  arose  a  sharp  contention,  so  that  they 
parted  asunder"  (Acts  15:  39)  ;  "The  good  which  I  would 
I  do  not"  (Rom.  7:  19)  ;  "But  when  they  came,  he  drew 
back  and  separated  himself,  fearing  them  that  were  of  the 
circumcision"  (Gal.  2:  12)  ;  2)  ratione  siibjecti  totalis,  or 
in  respect  of  the  person  sinning  in  general :  a)  mortalia  et 
venalia,  or  mortal  and  remissible  sins ;  the  former  imply 
spiritual  death,  the  latter  may  be  found  in  Christians,  i.  e., 
unintentional  sins  that  are  repented  of  and  forgiven.  Con- 
cerning venalia  compare  1  John  2:  1,  2;  b)  nostra  et  aliena, 
our  own  and  others'.  We  may  become  partakers  in  the  sins 
of  others  by  internal  or  external  assent.  "Be  not  ye  there- 
fore partakers  with  them"  (Eph.  5:  7;  5:  11)  ;  compare  the 
admonition  in  1  Tim.  5:  22;  "He  that  giveth  him  greeting 
partaketh  in  his  evil  works"  (2  John  11)  ;  3)  ratioyie  sub- 
jecti  partialis  or  in  respect  of  the  individual  mode  of  sin- 


176  ANTHROPOLOGY. 

ning:  a)  peccata  cordis  sen  interna  or  the  sins  of  the  heart; 
b)  peccata  oris  et  operis  sen  externa  or  the  sins  of  the 
mouth  and  deeds.  "For  from  within,  out  of  the  heart  of 
men,  evil  thoughts  proceed,"  etc.  (Mark  7:  21,  22)  ;  "The 
tongue  is  a  fire :  the  world  of  iniquity  among  our  members 
is  the  tongue"  (James  3 :  6)  ;  4)  ratione  actus  or  in  respect 
of  the  deed  itself  against  the  Law  of  God:  a)  peccata  com- 
missionis  or  sins  of  commission;  b)  peccata  omissionis  or 
the  sins  of  omission.  "To  him  therefore  that  knoweth  to 
do  good,  and  doeth  it  not,  to  him  it  is  sin"  (James  4:  17)  ; 
5)  ratione  objecti  or  in  respect  of  the  object:  a)  peccata  in 
Deum,  sins  against  God;  b)  peccata  in  proximum,  or  sins 
against  our  neighbor;  c)  in  ipsum  peccantem,  or  sins  against 
ourselves;  6)  ratione  effectus  or  in  respect  of  the  effect: 
a)  clamantia,  or  sins  which  cry  out  for  punishment;  b)  non 
clamantia,  or  sins  which  do  not  so  cry  out.  With  reference 
to  the  former  compare  the  sin  of  Cain,  the  sins  of  the 
Sodomites,  the  oppression  of  the  Israelites  in  Egypt  and  the 
hire  of  the  laborers.  With  regard  to  the  last  named  we 
quote  the  following:  "Behold,  the  hire  of  the  laborers  who 
mowed  your  fields,  which  is  of  you  kept  by  fraud,  crieth 
out:  and  the  cries  of  them  that  reaped  have  entered  into 
the  ears  of  the  Lord  of  Sabaoth"  (James  5:  4)  ;  7)  ratione 
acljnnctorum  or  in  respect  of  their  adjuncts:  a)  graviora  et 
leviora,  sins  more  or  less  grievous  (as  to  degree) ,  because 
a  Christian  in  certain  cases  sins  more  grievously  than  a 
heathen.  He  that  commits  adultery  with  another  man's 
wife  sins  more  grievously  than  the  man  who  steals  whpn 
he  is  hungry.  A  person  who  kills  his  mother  sins  more 
than  the  man  who  kills  an  enemy,  etc.  "Therefore  he  that 
delivered  me  unto  thee  hath  greater  sin"  (John  19:  11)  ; 
b)'  occulta  et  mariifesta,  secret  and  manifest.  A  secret  sin 
is  one  that  may  be  little  known  to  the  sinner  himself  or 
that  may  be  known  only  by  him  and  others  who  endeavor 
to  keep  it  secret.  A  manifest  sin  may  grow  into  a  great 
scandal  which  may  not  only  cause  public  offense,  but  also 
become  a  snare  to  others  "For  the  things  which  are  done 
by  them  in  secret  it  is  a  shame  even  to  speak  of"  (Eph.  5: 


ACTUAL,   SIN.  177 

12)  ;  "I  know  how  manifold  are  your  transgressions,  and 
how  mighty  are  your  sins — ye  that  afflict  the  just,  that  take 
a  bribe,  and  that  turn  aside  the  needy  in  the  gate  from  their 
right"  (Amos  5 :  12)  ;  c)  mortiia  et  viventia,  dead  and  living 
sins.  Dead  sins  are  such  as  are  not  known  as  sins,  or  which 
are  not  considered  as  great  as  they  really  are,  or  else  such 
as  have  been  partially  or  wholly  overcome.  They  are  there- 
fore no  longer  dominant.  "But  sin,  finding  occasion, 
wrought  in  me  through  the  commandment  all  manner  of 
coveting:  for  apart  from  the  law  sin  is  dead"  (Rom.  7:8); 
"Wherein  ye  also  once  walked,  when  ye  lived  in  these 
things"  (Col.  3:  5 — 7);  d)  manentia,  which  still  oppress 
by  their  guilt,  and  remissa  or  forgiven;  e)  conjuncta  cum 
indi(ratio7ie  et  ab  ea  sejuncta,  i.  e.,  some  sins  that  are  con- 
nected with  hardness  of  heart  and  others  not.  Compare 
2  Cor.  4:4;  Acts  5 :  3 ;  1  Sam.  6:6;  "Hardened  by  the  de- 
ceitfulness  of  sin"  (Heb.  3:  13)  ;  f)  remissibilia  et  irremis- 
sibilia  or  remissible  and  irremissible  sins.  To  the  latter 
belongs  the  sin  against  the  Holy  Ghost.  HOLLAZius  defines 
this  sin  as  follows:*  "Sin  agaiJist  the  Holy  Ghost  consists 
in  a  malicious  denial  of,  a  hostile  attack  upon,  a7id  a  horrid 
blasphemy  of  divine  truth,  clearly  knoivn  and  approved  by 
conscience,  together  loith  an  obstinate  ayid  finally  perse- 
vering rejection  of  all  the  means  of  scdvation."  All  of  these 
characteristics  ought  to  be  emphasized  and  combined.  This 
sin  can  be  committed  by  persons  who  in  a  Christian  sense 
have  not  been  converted,  as  well  as  by  Christians  who  have 
fallen  from  grace.  In  the  former  sense  this  sin  was  com- 
mitted by  the  Pharisees.  Compare  Luke  11 :  15  and  Mark 
3 :  28 — 30.  The  last-named  passage  reads  as  follows :  "All 
their  sins  shall  be  forgiven  unto  the  sons  of  men,  and  their 
blasphemies  wherewith  soever  they  shall  blaspheme:  but 
whosoever  shall  blaspheme  against  the  Holy  Spirit  hath 
never  forgiveness,  but  is  guilty  of  an  eternal  sin:  because 
they  said.  He  hath  an  unclean  spirit,"    With  regard  to  sin 

*HoLLAZius:  "Peccatum  in  Spiritum  Sanctum  est  veritatis  divinse 
evidenter  agnitse  et  in  conscientia  approbatae  malitiosa  abnegatio,  hos- 
tilis  impugnatio,horrenda  blasphematio  et  omnium  mediorum  salutis 
obstinata  et  finaliter  perseverans  rejectio." 

Dogmatics.     7. 


178  ANTHROPOLOGY. 

against  the  Holy  Ghost  in  the  latter  sense  we  quote  Heb.  6: 
4 — 6 :  "For  as  touching  those  who  were  once  enlightened 
and  tasted  of  the  heavenly  gift,  and  were  made  partakers 
of  the  Holy  Spirit,  and  tasted  the  good  word  of  God,  and 
the  powers  of  the  age  to  come,  and  then  fell  away,  it  is 
impossible  to  renew  them  again  unto  repentance;  seeing 
they  crucify  to  themselves  the  Son  of  God  afresh,  and  put 
him  to  an  open  shame."  Cf .  1  John  5:16:  "There  is  a  sin 
unto  death:  not  concerning  this  do  I  say  that  ye  should 
make  request."  Sin  against  the  Holy  Ghost  is  a  decided 
and  absolute  evil,  an  absolute  hardness  of  heart  which  al- 
ready in  this  life  has  identified  itself  with  satanic  egoism 
and  blasphemy.  Therefore  those  that  have  committed  this 
sin  cannot  be  forgiven,  because  they  will  not  repent.  There 
is  a  relative  hardness  of  heart  from  which  men  may  be 
saved,  but  when  a  person  has  become  definitely  and  abso- 
lutely hardened  in  heart,  there  is  no  longer  any  hope.  It  is 
an  abysmal  defection  which  merits  the  judgment  of  hell. 
Such  persons  are  ripe  for  hell  before  they  die,  i.  e.,  the  time 
of  their  visitation  is  at  an  end  before  the  period  of  grace 
is  finished.  The  sin  against  the  Holy  (ihost  in  this  sense  is 
to  be  distinguished  from  sins  against  the  Holy  Ghost  in 
ordinary  cases  where  sinners  withstand  the  Holy  Spirit  and 
where  even  Christians  grieve  the  Holy  Spirit  of  God.  The 
irremissible  sin  must  also  be  distinguished  from  a  special 
form  of  sin  against  Christ.  Men  may  blaspheme  Christ 
and  by  means  of  true  repentance  receive  the  forgiveness  of 
their  sin.  Such  blasphemy  is  relatively  superficial  and  is 
brought  about  by  ignorance,  infirmity  and  the  fear  of  man. 
Compare  Luke  12:  10  together  with  the  context.  "And 
every  one  who  shall  speak  a  word  against  the  Son  of  man, 
it  shall  be  forgiven  him:  but  unto  him  that  blasphemeth 
against  the  Holy  Spirit  it  shall  not  be  forgiven."  In  Matt. 
12:  31  we  read:  "Every  sin  and  blasphemy  shall  be  for- 
given unto  men ;  but  the  blasphemy  against  the  Spirit  shall 
not  be  forgiven."     Cf.  the  following  verse. 


FREEDOM   OF    THE   WILL   AND    MORAL   BONDAGE.  179 

3.    The  Effects  of  Actual  Sin. 

The  consequences  of  actual  sin  are:  a)  the  confirmation 
of  the  will  in  sin;  b)  accumulated  guilt;  c)  temporal  pun- 
ishment, for  sin  often  punishes  itself;  God  punishes  here 
and  now;  d)  eternal  punishment  in  hell.  God  shall  measure 
the  punishment  in  the  judgment  when  He  shall  judge  every 
man  according  to  his  deeds. 


§15.  THE  FREEDOM  OF  THE  WILL  AND  MORAL 
BONDAGE. 

As  a  person  man  possesses  a  will  or  the  power  of  self- 
determination  and  cannot  be  influenced  irresistibly  from 
within  or  without  by  instinct.  Human  freedom  consists  of 
two  elements:  1)  the  formal  or  self-determination;  2)  the 
material  or  determination  by  which  the  will  of  God  becomes 
the  determining  ground  for  the  will  of  man.  By  reason  of 
the  Fall  the  will  of  God  ceased  to  determine  the  will  of  man. 
Man's  power  of  self-determination  became  dominated  by 
selfishness.  The  form  of  freedom  was  filled  with  a  false 
content.  After  the  Fall  man  indeed  possesses  a  will,  but 
he  has  lost  the  free  will  as  determined  by  God.  He  has 
therefore  lost  the  freedom  of  the  will  in  relation  to  that 
which  is  good  and  determines  upon  that  which  is  evil,  if 
not  influenced  from  above.  The  Augsburg  Confession  de- 
clares that  the  natural  man  lacks  all  freedom  and  power 
in  spiritual  things,  that  he  possesses  freedom,  although  cur- 
tailed through  sin,  in  the  realm  of  the  intellect,  and  that  in 
some  measure  he  is  able  to  abstain  from  the  commission  of 
gross  sins. 

1.    Definition  of  the  Subject. 

The  principal  question  is.  What  is  the  relation  of  the  will 
to  spiritual  things  after  the  Fall?  The  Formula  of  Con- 
cord states  the  subject  as  follows:  What  unregenerated 
man,  by  his  own  powers  of  intellect  and  will,  can  accom- 
plish toward  his  conversion  and  regeneration.    The  answer 


180  ANTHKOPOLOGY. 

is  summed  up  in  the  terms :  defectus  lihevi  arhitrii  in  rebus 
spiritualibus,  or  the  loss  of  free  will  in  spiritual  things.  Ad- 
ditional points  are  comprised  under  two  heads:  1)  libenim 
arbitrium  in  malis,  or  free  will  in  evil  things;  2)  liberum 
arbitrium  in  rebus  exteriiis,  or  free  will  in  external  things. 

2.    The  Loss  ov  the  Free  Will  in  Spiritual  Things. 

This  defectus  or  loss  consists  of  two  elements:  1)  the 
negative,  or  the  absolute  want  of  all  power;  2)  the  positive, 
or  that  the  intellect  and  the  will  are  hostile  toward  God, 
which  is  expressed  in  the  formula  liberum  arbitrium  in 
malis.  By  nature,  therefore,  man  withstands  the  grace  of 
God.  The  Formula  of  Concord  says  that  even  in  the  re- 
generate the  natural  man  in  himself  is  constituted  in  the 
same  way  as  these  points  express.  Strong  expressions  are 
used  with  regard  to  the  unregenerate.  In  his  natural  state 
man  is  represented  as  a  stock  and  a  stone.  This  expression 
does  not  mean  that  man  has  become  a  stock  and  a  stone, 
nor  that  in  all  things  he  resembles  a  stock  and  a  stone.  Man 
has  not  lost  his  own  personal  nature.  But  as  the  stock  and 
the  stone  are  unyielding  and  withstand  external  influences, 
so  the  natural  man  possesses  no  power  in  himself  in  spir- 
itual things  save  to  obstruct  and  withstand  the  power  of 
God.  The  question  concerns  the  power  that  man  possesses 
in  himself  and  then  he  is  like  a  stock  and  a  stone.  But  he 
is  not  unimpressionable  like  a  stock  and  a  stone. 

3.    The  Two  Hemispheres. 

Some  Dogmaticians,  in  defining  the  natural  power  and 
want  of  power  in  man,  make  use  of  the  following  terms: 
hemisphxrium  inferius  and  hemisphserium  snperius. 

HoLLAZius  refers  the  following  to  hemisphaerium  in- 
ferius:* "All  things  and  actions,  physical,  ethical,  political, 
domestic,  artificial,  pedagogic,  and  divine,  as  far  as  they 
can  be  known  by  the  light  of  the  intellect  and  can  be  pro- 
duced by  the  powers  of  nature,  aided  by  the  general  con- 

*  Hon.  Exam.  Theol.  Acroam.  Pars  II,  Cap.  V,  623. 


FREEDOM   OF    THE   WILL   AND   MOUAL  BONDAGE.  181 

currence  of  God."  To  this  belongs  liberum  arbitrium  in 
externis.  To  this  hemisphere  belong  the  reading  and  hear- 
ing of  the  Word  of  God,  civic  righteousness,  etc.  Still  the 
natural  ability  that  belongs  to  this  lower  hemisphere  of  the 
powers  of  the  will  is  weak  and  infirm.  There  are  internal 
and  external  impediments.  Among  the  internal  impedi- 
ments may  be  mentioned  blindness  of  the  intellect,  obstinacy 
of  the  will,  vehemence  of  the  affections  and  perverseness  of 
the  natural  appetites  of  man.  Among  the  external  impedi- 
ments may  be  counted  the  influence  of  Satan,  the  fasci- 
nating blandishments  of  the  world,  the  fear  of  men,  un- 
foreseen happenings  and  misfortunes. 

In  hemisTphxrium  swperius  man  is  totally  helpless  and 
possesses  no  power  in  purely  spiritual  conditions.  In  this 
sphere  is  also  counted  the  reading  and  hearing  of  the  Word 
of  God  in  such  manner  as  to  be  of  profit  and  blessing.  Man 
has  indeed  the  natural  ability  to  read  and  hear,  but  by  his 
own  power  he  cannot  be  influenced  thereby  to  salvation. 

4.    Human  Freedom  and  the  Grace  of  God. 

The  human  will  can  be  liberated  through  grace,  but  not 
by  force  and  coercion.  All  determinism  must  be  excluded 
in  order  that  the  responsibility  of  man  may  be  maintained. 
Man  is  incapable  of  his  own  power  to  do  anything  toward 
his  own  spiritual  welfare  (indeed,  in  his  natural  state  he 
counteracts  that  welfare)  ;  still  he  must  be  brought  into  a 
state  or  condition  where  his  sense  of  responsibility  can  be 
aroused.  He  cannot  bring  himself  into  such  a  state,  but 
the  Lord  has  arranged  a  way  of  escape  and  made  it  possible 
for  man  to  be  influenced  from  above.  The  Holy  Spirit  ap- 
proaches man  especially  through  the  means  of  grace  and 
through  these  alone  exerts  His  saving  influence  and  activ- 
ity. Through  the  means  of  grace  man  becomes  the  object 
of  the  work  of  grace.  It  is  not  the  work  of  man,  but  from 
beginning  to  end  all  is  by  grace.  In  this  incipient  activity 
the  grace  of  God  is  called  prevenient  grace  or  gratia  prse- 
veniens.  By  this  means  man  is  put  in  a  position  where  he 
can  determine  for  himself  whether  he  will  cease  or  continue 


182  ANTHKOl'OLOGY. 

to  withstand  the  activity  of  the  Holy  Spirit.  Left  to 
himself,  man  would  continue  in  a  state  of  sin  and  hos- 
tility. It  is  possible  for  prevenient  grace  to  operate  in 
the  heart  of  man,  inasmuch  as  the  im.age  of  God  in  a 
formal  sense  still  remains,  thereby  providing  a  ground  of 
religious  life.  Although  man  is  permeated  by  sin  and  to- 
tally incapacitated  in  spiritual  things,  still  the  essence  of 
man  is  not  sinful.  The  image  of  God  in  the  formal  sense 
as  found  in  man  does  not  denote  that  man  possesses  ability 
in  spiritual  things,  it  simply  provides  a  point  of  contact. 
In  its  activity  prevenient  grace  comes  in  touch  with  this 
point  of  contact,  the  ground  of  the  religious  life  in  man.  To 
illustrate  by  a  figure  what  takes  place,  let  us  say  that  it  is 
like  a  man  listening  to  a  familiar  note  from  the  homeland, 
the  Paradise  that  is  lost.  In  his  original  state  in  Paradise 
man  was  put  to  the  test,  but  failed  in  that  test.  Through 
prevenient  grace  man  is  again  put  to  the  test,  and  the  ques- 
tion is  whether  or  not  he  will  return  to  Paradise.  In  coming 
in  contact  with  the  means  of  grace  man  cannot  escape  the 
activity  of  prevenient  grace.  For  this  reason  gratia  prae- 
veniens  has  been  called  inevitabilis  or  inevitable,  and  irre- 
sistibilis  or  irresistible,  in  the  sense  that  man  cannot  escape 
the  distinctive  influence  of  this  activity.  At  this  juncture 
the  self-determination  of  man  comes  into  play,  otherwise 
man  would  not  be  responsible.  The  Holy  Spirit  exerts  His 
activity,  but  He  cannot  force  a  man.  Luther  and  the 
Formula  of  Concord  state  that  man  possesses  Swa/ui?  iraOrjTiKr] 
or  capacitas,  non  activa,  sed  passiva,  by  which  is  meant 
that  man  can  become,  although  he  cannot  make  himself,  a 
partaker  of  the  grace  of  God.  There  is  no  activity  through 
the  freedom  of  the  will  toward  that  which  is  good,  but  by 
grace  man  may  become  passive.  If  he  remain  in  quietness, 
then  the  redeeming  power  of  grace  will  continue,  and  he 
will  become  active  through  the  powers  bestowed  by  the  Holy 
Spirit  in  conversion.  But  if  he  withstands  the  work  of  the 
Spirit,  then  the  result  will  not  only  be  resistentia  naturalis, 
but  resistentia  malitiosa  or  nolle  positivum.  In  this  way 
a  higher  state  of  corruption  is  reached. 


FREEDOM    OF    THE    WILL    AND    MORAL    BONDAGE.  183 

Some  have  thought  that  the  Lutheran  Church  is  not  con- 
sistent in  this  doctrine,  teaching  as  she  does  that  man  is 
incapable  of  doing  anything  toward  his  salvation  and  still 
is  responsible,  but  when  we  understand  the  question  as 
dealt  with  in  the  Augsburg  Confession,  and  which  the 
Formula  of  Concord  emphasizes,  then  it  is  evident  that 
there  is  no  inconsistency.  This  subject  has  already  been 
discussed ;  we  would  merely  add  that  man  has  power  to  use 
the  Word  of  God,  even  if  by  his  own  power  he  cannot  read 
and  hear  in  such  manner  as  to  receive  a  blessing.  In  this 
way  man  first  becomes  responsible,  inasmuch  as  God  works 
through  the  means  of  grace.  But  as  soon  as  a  man  reads 
and  hears  the  Word  of  God,  then  the  Holy  Spirit  is  present 
with  prevenient  grace.  In  this  connection  attention  ought 
to  be  called  to  the  fact  that  there  is  a  great  difference  be- 
tween the  unbaptized  heathen  and  a  baptized  Christian, 
even  though  the  latter  has  fallen  from  the  grace  of  Bap- 
tism. He  that  has  been  baptized  has  at  one  time  possessed 
an  arbitrium  liberatum  or  liberated  will  and  is  therefore 
continuously  an  object  of  special  grace.  The  strong  expres- 
sions in  the  P^'ormula  of  Concord  concern  the  natural  man 
and  tell  what  the  unregenerated  man  is  able  to  accomplish 
by  his  own  power,  and  the  answer  is  that  he  can  do  nothing 
of  his  own  power,  indeed,  he  only  resists  the  work  of  the 
Holy  Spirit.  He  that  has  been  regenerated  once  in  Baptism 
is  therefore  more  responsible  than  the  heathen,  who  has 
never,  as  has  the  Christian,  possessed  a  liberated  will. 

Therefore  of  his  own  natural  power  man  can  do  nothing, 
but  grace  does  all.  Although  there  is  no  real  co-operation 
before  conversion,  it  is  nevertheless  taught  that  man  co- 
operates after  conversion.  This  co-operation  is,  however, 
not  a  natural  product,  but  is  the  activity  of  the  regenerated 
man  through  the  powers  and  endowments  which  the  Holy 
Spirit  began  to  bestow  in  conversion.' 

The  following  passages  of  Scripture  may  be  quoted  as 
being  of  importance  in  the  solution  of  this  question :  "For 
ye  were  once  darkness"  (Eph.  5:  8)  ;  ''The  natural  man 
receiveth  not  the  things  of  the  Spirit  of  God :  for  they  are 


184  ANTIIKOPOLOGY. 

foolishness  unto  him ;  and  he  cannot  know  them,  because 
they  are  spiritually  judged"  (1  Cor.  2:  14)  ;  "Not  that  we 
are  sufficient  of  ourselves,  to  account  anything  as  from 
ourselves"  (2  Cor.  3:5);  "The  mind  of  the  flesh  is  enmity 
against  God"  (Rom.  8:7);  "Every  one  that  committeth  sin 
is  the  bondservant  of  sin"  (John  8:  34)  ;  "When  Gentiles 
that  have  not  the  law  do  by  nature  the  things  of  the  law" 
(Rom.  2:  14)  ;  "As  touching  the  righteousness  which  is  in 
the  law,  found  blameless"  (Phil.  3:6);  "But  without  thy 
mind  I  would  "do  nothing ;  tha,t  thy  goodness  should  not  be 
of  necessity,  but  of  free  will"  (Philemon  14)  ;  "But  hath 
power  as  touching  his  own  will"  (1  Cor.  7 :  37)  ;  "Now  when 
they  heard  this,  they  were  pricked  in  their  heart.  .  .  .and 
Peter  said  unto  them,  Repent  ye"  (Acts  2:  37,  38)  ;  "Repent 
ye  therefore,  and  turn  again"  (Acts  3:  19);  "So  belief 
Cometh  of  hearing,  and  hearing  by  the  word  of  Christ" 
(Rom.  10:  17)  ;  "I  said  therefore  unto  you,  that  ye  shall  die 
in  your  sins :  for  except  ye  believe  that  I  am  he,  ye  shall  die 
in  your  sins"  (John  8:  24);  "If  therefore  the  Son  shall 
make  you  free,  ye  shall  be  free  indeed"  (John  8 :  36)  ;  "For 
by  grace  have  ye  been  saved  through  faith ;  and  that  not  of 
yourselves,  it  is  the  gift  of  God"  (Eph.  2:8);  "For  the  law 
of  the  Spirit  of  life  in  Christ  made  me  free  from  the  law 
of  sin  and  death"  (Rom.  8:2);  "For  as  many  of  you  as 
were  baptized  into  Christ  did  put  on  Christ"  (Gal.  3:  27)  ; 
"Look  therefore  carefully  how  ye  walk,  not  as  unwise,  but 
as  wise"  (Eph.  5:  15)  ;  "Give  the  more  diligence  to  make 
your  calling  and  election  sure"  (2  Peter  1:  10)  ;  "I  can  do 
all  things  in  him  that  strengtheneth  me"  (Phil.  4:  13)  ;  "If 
by  the  Spirit  ye  put  to  death  the  deeds  of  the  body"  (Rom. 
8:  13). 

5.    Notes  on  the  History  of  Dogma. 

The  Greek  Fathers  laid  stress  in  general  on  human  free- 
dom and  self-determination.  Still  they  speak  of  the  assist- 
ance of  grace  and  the  work  of  enlightenment.  The  Occi- 
dental or  Latin  Fathers,  indeed,  lay  greater  stress  on  grace, 
but  they  also  set  forth  the  ability  of  man.     The  real  con- 


FREEDOM    OF    THE    WILL    AND    MORAL    BONDAGE.  185 

troversy  on  the  relationship  between  grace  and  freedom 
began  with  Pelagianism  and  has  continued  ever  since  in  one 
form  or  another.  PELAGIUS  teaches  that  man  is  practically 
sound  and  can  do  whatever  he  wills  to  do,  for  which  reason 
grace  is  superfluous  or  else  possesses  little  significance. 
Augustine  said  that  man  is  bound  and  in  a  spiritual  sense 
dead.  He  rejected  the  formal  element  in  freedom  and  ended 
in  Determinism,  just  as  Pelagius,  who  went  to  the  opposite 
extreme,  ended  in  Indifferentism.  Semi-Pelagianism  set 
forth  the  spiritual  sickness  and  weakness  of  man,  who 
nevertheless  possessed  the  power  to  begin  his  conversion. 
During  the  Middle  Ages  a  synergistic  tendency  began  to 
appear.  The  Thomists  represented  this  tendency,  although 
neither  Semi-Pelagianism  nor  Synergism  are  found  fully 
developed  in  Thomas  Aquinas.  The  Scotists  represented 
Semi-Pelagianism  and  Indifferentism.  For  this  reason  the 
Roman  Catholic  conception  became  synergistic  in  theory  and 
Semi-Pelagian  in  practice.  The  Protestant  Churches  taught 
that  man  does  not  possess  liberum  arbitrium  in  spirituali- 
bus  and  Calvin  was  led  into  the  doctrine  of  unconditional 
predestination.  The  Lutheran  Church  was  fortunate  in 
avoiding  extremes  in  setting  forth  the  grace  of  God  and  still 
maintaining  and  emphasizing  the  responsibility  of  man. 
However,  during  the  period  of  the  Reformation  a  contro- 
versy broke  out  concerning  the  freedom  of  the  will.  The 
Synergists  declared  that  the  will  constituted  a  third  factor 
in  conversion,  that  man  was  indeed  unable  to  begin  his  con- 
version, but  that  he  had  the  power  in  himself  to  co-operate 
with  the  grace  of  God.  The  Socinians  and  Arminians 
adopted  Pelagian  and  Semi-Pelagian  views.  The  Kantian 
School,  the  Rationalists,  the  mediating  theologians  in  gen- 
eral together  with  the  Ritschlians  advocate  more  or  less 
strongly  developed  Pelagian  and  synergistic  views. 

Justin  Mar'tyr  presented  the  power  of  self-determination  on  the 
part  of  man  in  the  choice  between  good  and  evil.  Clement  of  Alex- 
andria says  that  power  for  good  is  found  in  every  man.  Iren^us 
stresses  human  freedom,  but  says  that  man  is  like  a  withered  tree  that 
cannot  bear  fruit  unless  watered  from  above.  Tertullian  set  forth 
the  necessity  of  grace,  not  only  as  an  aid  in  spiritual  things,  but  also 


186  ANTHROPOLOGY. 

as  a  creative  principle.  Man,  however,  can  will  to  accept  grace  and 
thus  begin  repentance.  Origkn  says  that  man  can  decide  for  the  good, 
although  the  co-operation  of  God  is  necessary.  Cypkiax  declared  that 
our  strength  was  lost,  but  that  faith  is  ours  and  upon  its  quantum  de- 
pends how  much  we  receive.  Cykil  of  Jekusalem  teaches  that  God 
grants  His  grace  to  those  that  are  worthy  and  that  faith  is  our  own 
possession.  Gregory  of  Nazianzvs  says  that  penitence  depends  both 
on  us  and  God.  Gregory  of  Nyssa  says  the  human  will  and  the  grace 
of  God  must  co-operate.  Ciikysostom  teaches  that  we  must  first  begin, 
then  God  comes  to  our  assistance.  A.mrrose  says  that  the  grace  of  God 
is  needed  to  begin  repentance,  and  he  speaks  of  a  gratia  praeparans 
interna.  However,  he  makes  a  distinction  between  praecepta  and  con- 
cilia, stating  that  the  latter  have  special  merit.  Pei-agius  ascribes  to 
man  power  to  choose.  There  is  a  natural  capability  (posse)  which 
is  the  gift  of  God,  but  to  will  and  to  do  (velle  et  facere)  belong  to 
human  freedom.  There  is  special  grace  for  the  Christians,  which  con- 
fers the  forgiveness  of  sins  for  actual  sins  and  renders  assistance  in 
that  which  is  good  or  enlightenment  through  the  teaching  and  example 
of  Christ.  The  conferring  of  this  grace  makes  easy  what  man  of  him- 
self is  otherwise  able  to  accomplish.  AuorsxixE  says  that  the  human 
will  is  incapable,  that  it  tends  toward  sin.  There  is  no  real  good  out- 
side of  grace.  The  grace  of  God  is  a  creative  principle  and  is  bestowed 
without  merit.  He  speaks  of  gratia  irresistibilis,  prseveniens,  operans 
et  cooperans  and  of  donum  perseverantiae.  The  Semi-Pelagians  taught 
that  nature  had  simply  become  infirm  through  sin.  By  his  own  power 
man  is  capable  of  co-operating  in  his  own  conversion  when  supported 
by  grace.  Man  begins  and  then  the  grace  of  God  enters  in  to  assist. 
Pelagianism  was  rejected  in  418  and  431,  while  Semi-Pelagianism  was 
rejected  in  529.  Joiix  of  Damascus  declared  that  the  moral  power  of 
man  was  only  weakened  through  the  Fall.  Man  is  now  just  as  free 
as  Adam.     Reason  and  freedom  have  not  been  lost. 

John  Scotus  Erigena  taught  that  man  possesses  freedom,  but  that  it 
does  not  become  active  except  through  grace.  Man  is  capable  of  seeing 
even  in  darkness,  but  the  objects  of  vision  do  not  become  visible  be- 
fore the  light  appears.  A.nselm  rejected  the  view  of  Augustine  that 
man  is  free  to  choose  only  the  evil  and  considered  that  the  power  of 
the  will  to  choose  and  do  the  right  was  indispensable.  We  must  dis- 
tinguish between  the  faculty  and  its  use.  Adam  failed  in  its  use,  but 
the  faculty  remains.  Higo  of  St.  Victor  has  the  following  to  say 
concerning  human  freedom:  1)  In  the  state  of  integrity  man  possessed 
the  power  to  sin  or  not  to  sin  (posse  peccare  et  posse  non  peccare) ; 
2)  after  the  Fall,  before  the  restoration,  freedom  is  infirm,  so  that  man 
possesses  the  power  to  sin  and  is  incapable  of  not  sinning  (posse 
peccare  et  non  posse  non  peccare) ;  3)  after  the  restoration,  but  prior 
to  confirmation  in  that  which  is  good,  there  is  power  to  do  the  good 


FKEEDOai    OF    THE    WILL    A^s'D    MORAL    BONDAGE.  187 

and  infirmity  in  relation  to  evil,  so  that  man  is  capable  of  sinning,  but 
has  the  ability  also  of  not  sinning  (posse  peccare  et  posse  non  peccarej  : 
4)  in  the  more  perfect  state  there  is  the  possibility  of  not  sinning  and 
the  impossibility  of  sinning,  the  latter  dependent  on  the  confirming 
grace  of  God  (posse  non  peccare  et  non  posse  peccare).  Peter  Lombard 
like  Augustine  speaks  of  gratia  operans  et  cooperans.  However,  while 
Augustine  says  that  the  natural  will  is  dead  in  relation  to  the  good, 
Lombard  considers  that  it  is  merely  weak  and  infirm.  He  also  makes 
use  of  the  following  classification  of  grace:  gratia  gratis  dans,  who 
is  God  Himself,  gratia  gratis  data,  which  is  the  same  as  gratia  prse- 
veniens  et  operans,  and  gratia  gratum  faciens,  which  is  the  same  as 
gratia  cooperans,  which  is  meritorious.  Alexander  of  Hales  advocated 
the  Semi-Pelagian  view  and  says  that  after  the  Fall  there  is  to  be 
found  a  receptivity  for  grace.  Thomas  of  Aquixas  said  that  God  works 
that  which  is  good  in  us  without  our  assistance,  but  not  without  our 
consent.  Man  is  capable  of  inclining  himself  to  receive  the  grace  of 
God  and  thus  win  for  himself  meritum  de  congruo.  This  merit  of 
fitness  has,  however,  not  come  about  except  through  the  presence  of 
the  grace  of  God.  Through  meritum  congrui  gratia  habitualis  is  re- 
ceived, by  means  of  which  man  gains  for  himself  the  merit  of  worthi- 
ness or  meritum  ex  condigno.  Even  in  the  converted  soul  he  dis- 
tinguishes between  meritum  congrui  and  meritum  condigni.  In  his 
doctrine  of  meritum  congrui  there  is  a  Semi-Pelagian  tendency  and 
in  the  doctrine  of  meritum  condigni  a  synergistic  tendency,  but  in 
general  Thomas  Aquinas  represents  the  synergistic  view.  Duns  Scotus, 
who  advocated  Pelagianism,  says  that  after  the  Fall  man  still  possesses 
the  use  of  his  free  will,  which  is  arbitrary,  and  that  he  can  incline 
himself  to  receive  the  grace  of  God.  Gabriel  Biel  taught  that  even 
after  the  Fall  man  is  capable  of  producing  bonum  morale  and  of  his 
own  power  to  love  God  above  all  things,  but  bonum  morale  becomes 
bonum  meritorium  through  gratia  gratum  faciens,  which  man  lost  on 
account  of  original  sin.  The  Council  of  Trent  taught  that  liberum 
arbitrium  was  not  extinct  through  the  Fall,  but  only  made  infirm. 
The  grace  of  God  begins  conversion,  but  man  is  afterwards  capable 
of  cooperating.  In  theory  the  Council  supported  the  synergistic  view. 
Bellarmin  sets  forth  human  freedom  and  the  grace  of  God  as  co- 
ordinated and  makes  use  of  the  following  illustration:  It  is  the  same 
as  when  two  persons  are  engaged  in  the  act  of  carrying  a  huge  stone 
which  neither  of  the  two  was  able  to  carry;  neither  increases  the 
power  of  the  other  nor  does  he  urge  him  on;  each  is  perfectly  at  liberty 
to  leave  the  burden,  but  if  one  of  the  two  no  longer  desires  to  co- 
operate, then  nothing  will  come  of  their  labors. 

In  the  beginning  Luther  indeed  advocated  Determinism,  but  the 
reason  for  this  is  easily  understood,  and  he  afterwards  abandoned 
this  position.    His  explanation  of  the  Third  Article  shows  clerirl;/  v;lAi 


188  ANTHROPOLOGY. 

he  thought  about  the  ability  of  man.  Melanchthon  departed  from 
the  position  of  Luther,  which  he  first  advocated.  He  taught  that  to 
a  certain  extent  man  possesses  a  free  will  in  spiritual  things.  In  his 
revision  of  the  Loci  which  he  published  in  1535  he  set  forth  that  there 
are  three  factors  that  co-operate  in  conversion,  viz.,  the  Word,  the 
Holy  Spirit,  and  the  human  will.  In  the  edition  of  1548  he  ascribes 
to  the  will  of  man  facultas  applicandi  se  ad  gratiam.  Man  was  at 
least  capable  of  saying  "yes"  to  the  grace  of  God.  His  doctrine  gave 
rise  to  the  synergistic  controversy.  In  1555  Pfeffinger  published  a 
work  on  the  free  will  in  which  he  set  forth  the  co-operation  of  the 
free  will  or  Synergism.  Stkiegel  taught  that  the  Holy  Spirit  must 
begin  the  work  of  conversion,  showing  in  this  respect  the  inability 
of  man,  but  he  nevertheless  possesses  modus  agendi  et  aptitudo  moralis. 
This  contained  a  positive  power  toward  the  good.  The  human  will  is 
not  dead,  but  infirm.  Aroused  by  the  Spirit,  the  will  becomes  syner- 
gistic. The  power  to  do  good  is  therefore  not  the  work  of  the  Spirit, 
but  a  natural  capacity.  The  ability  of  man  was  therefore  a  factor  in 
conversion.  TJie  Formula  of  Concord  naturally  rejected  Synergism  as 
well  as  Pelagianism  and  Semi-Pelagianism  and  recognized  only  two 
factors  in  conversion,  viz.,  the  Word  and  the  Holy  Spirit.  Selxecker 
spoke  of  the  natural  man  as  possessing  carnalis  conatus  in  relation  to 
the  Word  of  God.  ^gidius  Hunnius  ascribed  to  man  a  general  longing 
for  salvation.  The  Socinians  taught  that  in  his  natural  state  man  pos- 
sesses freedom  both  with  regard  to  good  and  evil.  The  Ar7ninia7is  said 
that  man  possesses  power  to  incline  himself  to  obey  the  will  of  God. 
HouNEjus  declared  that  between  actiones  spirituales,  which  can  be 
wrought  only  by  special  grace,  and  opera  civilia,  which  can  be  done 
by  natural  man,  there  ought  to  be  placed  opera  moralia.  The  latter 
can  be  produced  by  general  divine  grace.  Mus.eus  ascribes  to  man 
certain  actus  pedagogici  in  regard  to  knowledge  and  will  which  may 
develop  into  a  high  regard  for  salvation.  Budd.eus  taught  that  the 
grace  of  God  was  to  be  found  in  a  general  way  even  outside  of  the 
pale  of  salvation. 

Although  Kaxt  set  forth  the  doctrine  of  radical  evil,  still  he  took 
the  position  that  man  could  convert  himself,  basing  it  on  the  teaching 
of  the  so-called  categorical  imperative,  thou  shalt,  because  thou  canst. 
Scm.EiERMACHKH,  Hase,  NiTZScii,  J.  MuLLER  and  others  advocated  to  a 
greater  or  less  extent  synergistic  views.  Martensex  speaks  of  grace 
that  is  inborn,  of  essential  freedom,  and  that  man  has  ability  to  open 
his  heart  to  receive  the  grace  of  God.  Such  theologians  as  Thomasius 
and  Frank,  of  course,  reject  Synergism,  but  require  that  emphasis  be 
placed  not  only  on  the  active  relationship  during  conversion  on  the 
ground  of  the  liberating  activity  of  salvation,  but  also  on  the  possi- 
bility of  a  state  of  preparation  on  the  basis  of  the  general  divine 
activity  through  the  conscience. 


III.     CHRISTOLOGY. 


Christology  is  that  part  of  Dogmatics  which  treats  of  the 
doctrine  of  Christ's  person,  under  which  the  following  main 
subjects  are  discussed:  The  Necessity  of  the  God-man,  the 
Incarnation,  Jesus  Christ  as  True  God  and  True  Man,  the 
Personal  Union  and  the  Communion  of  Natures,  Commu- 
nicatio  Idiomatum,  and  the  States  of  Christ. 

Christology,  which  stands  in  the  closest  union  with  So- 
teriology,  constitutes  the  central  theme  in  Dogmatics.  The- 
ology cannot  be  properly  understood  except  in  the  light  of 
Christology.  Moreover,  so  far  as  the  remaining  parts  of 
Dogmatics  are  concerned,  Christology  is  the  sun  that  illu- 
mines them  and  about  which  they  all  revolve  in  harmony 
and  order. 

The  Christology  of  the  Lutheran  Church  is  the  founda- 
tion of  her  doctrine  of  Justification,  and  therefore  when  we 
consider  the  importance  of  this  doctrine  as  the  material 
principle  of  our  Church,  we  can  readily  appreciate  why 
Christology  should  be  accorded  the  important  position  it 
occupies.  Faith  justifies  because  it  accepts  Christ,  who  is 
the  Saviour.  The  Saviour  m^ust  be  true  Gud  and  true  man. 
Luther,  for  whom  our  Church  was  named,  was  certain  of 
his  justification,  because  in  faith  he  had  accepted  Christ. 
The  theology  of  Luther  did  not  depend  on  scientific  investi- 
gations and  research,  but  was  grounded  in  his  religious 
experiences.  The  experience  of  faith  is  also  the  argument 
for  the  Christology  of  the  Lutheran  Church. 

The  Lutheran  Christology  reaches  its  culmination  in  the 
doctrine  of  communicatio  idiomatum.  The  doctrinal  de- 
velopment concerning  the  communication  of  the  attributes 
and  the  communion  of  the  actions  or  concerning  the  idio- 


190  CUKISTOLOGY. 

matic  or  personal  propositions  is  characteristic  of  our 
Church.  This  doctrinal  presentation  in  turn  provides  a 
sure  foundation,  according  to  the  Word  of  God,  for  other 
important  doctrines  of  our  Church.  Among  these  may  be 
mentioned  the  atonement,  justification  and  the  Lord's  Sup- 
per. In  considering  especially  the  Lord's  Supper  it  is  true 
that  Luther  did  not  in  the  final  analysis  base  his  conception 
of  it  on  his  doctrine  of  Christology,  but  upon  the  sure  words 
of  Christ  at  the  institution  of  the  Holy  Supper;  still  com- 
municatio  idiomatum  throws  a  clear  light  on  this  subject 
and  explains  the  Lutheran  standpoint.  From  one  point  of 
view  we  may  say  that  the  doctrine  of  Christology  is  based 
on  the  doctrine  of  the  Lord's  Supper,  while  from  another 
we  may  say  that  the  latter  is  grounded  in  the  former. 

§16.  THE  NECESSITY  AND  THE  REALITY  OF  THE 

GOD-MAN. 

God-man  is  a  word  that  expresses  a  heaven-born  and 
eternal  thought  which  was  realized  in  the  fulness  of  time. 
No  man  could  have  attained  unto  so  exalted  a  thought.  There 
must  be  a  special  reason  why  God  became  man.  He  who 
was  eternally  self-sufficient  could  not  feel  the  need  of  as- 
suming manhood.  We  remember  what  the  creative  will  of 
(iod  implied.  When  this  could  not  be  realized  because  of 
sin,  then  there  followed  another  divine  decree.  It  is  always 
in  such  connection  that  the  Scriptures  speak  of  the  incarna- 
tion of  the  Son  of  God.  The  Word  of  God  does  not  tell  us 
whether  or  not  the  Son  of  God  would  have  become  man  in 
case  sin  had  not  come  into  the  world.  But  since  the  Scrip- 
tures always  present  the  incarnation  as  a  necessity  for  the 
salvation  of  man,  this  fact  itself  forms  a  sure  basis  for  the 
opinion  that  the  Son  of  God  would  not  have  assumed  human 
flesh  had  not  the  decree  of  salvation  required  it.  The  pos- 
sibility of  the  incarnation  cannot  be  denied,  inasmuch  as  it 
is  a  fact  that  the  Son  of  God  has  become  man.  In  any  other 
case  Jesus  Christ  would  be  the  riddle  and  unsolved  problem 
of  human  history. 


THE    NECESSITY    AND   THE   REALITY   OF   THE   GOD-MAN.  191 

1.    The  Necessity  of  the  God-man. 

The  necessity  for  the  Son  of  God  to  assume  our  human 
nature  is  therefore  based  on  sin  and  the  human  need  of 
salvation  through  a  Saviour  and  Mediator  that  belonged  to 
both  sides,  i.  e.,  was  both  God  and  man. 

There  are  many  theologians  who  declare  that  the  incar- 
nation lay  within  the  scope  of  creation  itself.  Such  theo- 
logians consider  the  idea  absurd  that  man  should  have  come 
into  closer  relationship  with  God  through  sin  than  would 
have  been  the  case  had  he  remained  in  the  state  of  integrity. 
If  so,  they  argue,  sin  would  have  brought  about  such  a  great 
effect,  that  a  foreign  element,  viz.,  human  nature,  would 
forever  have  entered  into  the  Trinity.  Their  real  argument 
for  the  incarnation  independent  of  sin  is  that  the  Son  of 
God  is  considered  as  the  head  and  center  of  humanity.  The 
head  must  be  a  part  of  the  organism. 

With  regard  to  these  views  the  following  answers  may  be 
given :  It  is  impossible  to  prove  that  the  incarnation  was 
a  part  of  the  plan  of  creation.  It  may  be  said,  indeed,  that 
in  a  way  man  as  saved  through  Jesus  Christ  has  come 
nearer  to  (Jod  by  reason  of  the  incarnation  which  took  place 
on  account  of  sin,  and  yet  God  was  very  near  to  man  and 
man  near  to  God  in  the  state  of  innocence,  Besides,  man 
was  created  in  the  image  of  God,  so  that  the  race  of  men 
was  the  offspring  of  God.  The  question  of  a  foreign  ele- 
ment entering  into  the  Trinity  is  not  disconcerting,  inas- 
much as  this  was  foreseen  and  determined  upon  in  eternity. 
The  Son  of  God  could  have  been  the  head  of  humanity  with- 
out being  a  part  of  the  organism.  We  must  be  careful  not 
to  lay  too  much  stress  on  the  relationship  between  the  body 
and  the  head  in  the  figure  and  thereby  lose  sight  of  the 
main  idea,  viz.,  that  the  Son  of  God  was  the  eternal  proto- 
type of  humanity,  indeed  the  ideal  man.  The  doctrine  of 
incarnation  independent  of  sin  has  no  clear  support  in 
Scripture.  It  is  based  on  vague  speculation  and  mere  guess- 
work, having  no  sure  foundation. 


192  C'll  HISTOLOGY. 

2.    The  Possibility  of  the  God-man. 

The  necessity  of  the  God-man  would  seem  to  presuppose 
His  possibility.  To  the  superficial  thinker  it  appears  alto- 
gether impossible  for  the  Son  of  God  to  assume  human 
nature  and  become  true  man.  Neither  is  there  any  analogy. 
We  might  refer  to  unio  mystica  in  the  experience  of  the 
Christian,  but  this  is  no  adequate  comparison.  Although 
no  analogy  can  be  found  to  illustrate  the  possibility  of  the 
God-man,  still  no  true  Christian  doubts  this  possibility, 
having  experienced  the  reality  of  it  through  faith.  Of 
course,  there  are  always  nominal  Christians  who  raise 
objections. 

These  objections  are  of  the  same  character  as  those  of 
the  Deists  and  the  Rationalists,  They  declare  that  He  who 
is  infinite,  immeasurable  and  omnipresent  could  not  possibly 
unite  Himself  with  that  which  is  finite  and  limited  to  time 
and  space.  Their  misconception  arises  from  the  fact  that 
they  consider  God  as  infinite  and  man  as  finite  in  an  ex- 
tensive sense.  But  God  is  infinite  and  immeasurable  in  an 
intensive  sense.  True,  man  is  finite,  being  only  a  relative 
personality,  but  from  the  religious  aspect  man  realizes  that 
he  is  created  in  the  image  of  God  and  for  this  reason  he  is 
in  a  certain  sense  partaker  in  the  infinity  of  God.  The  fact 
that  man  was  created  in  the  image  of  God  and  destined  for 
eternal  life  explains  the  fact  of  the  incarnation.  This 
miracle  could  take  place  because  God  willed  it.  A  king  can 
assume  the  position  of  a  servant.  Why  should  not  the  Son 
of  God  be  able  to  become  man  and  still  remain  supra- 
mundane?  There  was  no  hindrance.  The  imperfection  of 
the  human  intellect  and  our  inability  to  explain  the  great 
miracle  prove  nothing,  for  many  things  are  possible  which 
we  do  not  comprehend,  while  to  God  nothing  is  impossible 
save  that  which  militates  against  His  holy  will. 

3.    Concerning  the  Incarnation. 

HOLLAZius  gives  the  following  definition:  "Incarnatio 
07'  unitio  is  the  divine  act  through  which  the  Son  of  God 


THE   NECESSITY    AND    THE   REALITY    OF    THE    GOD-MAN.  193 

assumed  in  the  unity  of  His  person  a  human  nature  in  the 
womb  of  the  Virgin  Mary."  In  this  connection  we  quote 
the  following  from  Bjorling's  Dogmatics.:*  "In  the  act  of 
the  incarnation  the  divine  self-consciousness  takes  up  the 
human  into  communion  with  itself,  and  the  divine  self- 
determination  takes  up  the  human  into  communion  with 
itself.  In  this  manner  there  arises  a  person  who  is  con- 
scious of  the  fact  that  He  is  both  God  and  man." 

When  the  Son  actively  assumed  the  nature  of  man,  while 
at  the  same  time  the  other  persons  were  active  in  the  in- 
carnation, it  is  important  to  define  more  closely  in  what 
the  other  persons  participated.  When  the  question  con- 
cerns the  cause  of  the  act  of  incarnation,  then  it  is  an  opus 
ad  extra  and  is  ascribed  to  the  Trinity.  On  the  other  hand, 
when  the  question  concerns  the  accomplishment  of  the  act. 
then  it  is  an  opus  ad  intra  and  is  ascribed  to  the  Son.  The 
activity  of  the  three  persons  is  divided  in  the  following  w^ay : 

1)  The  Father  sends  the  Son.  The  following  passages 
may  be  cited:  "For  God  so  loved  the  world,  that  he  gave 
his  only  begotten  Son"  (John  3:  16).  "That  spared  not 
his  own  Son,  but  delivered  him  up  for  us  all"  (Rom.  8 :  32) . 
"When  the  fulness  of  time  came,  God  sent  forth  his  Son" 
(Gal.  4:4). 

2)  The  Son  assumed  human  nature  and  became  man.  In 
Luke  1 :  35  we  read :  "The  power  of  the  Most  High  shall 
overshadow  thee."  This  refers  to  the  Son.  Hollazius** 
says:  "Overshadowing  denotes  the  mysterious  and  won- 
derful filling  of  the  temple  of  the  body,  formed  by  the  Holy 
Ghost,  for  the  Son  indeed  overshadowed  the  Virgin  Mary 
and  by  a  peculiar  assimilation  filled  and  united  to  Himself 
a  part  of  the  Virgin's  blood,  influenced  by  the  Holy  Ghost, 
so  that  He  dwelt  in  it  bodily  as  in  His  own  temple." 

3)  The  work  of  the  Holy  Ghost  is  presented  in  a  three- 
fold way:  a)  ^ixtovpyiKri  or  formativa,  by  which  is  meant 
that  the  Holy  Ghost  influenced  Mary,  so  that  without  male 
seed  she  could  conceive.     The  Holy  Ghost  formed  in  the 

*  Björlings  Dogmatik,  Part  II,  sec.  iir,  p.  56. 
**  Exam.  Theol.  Acroam.,  Pars  III,  Qu.  14,  p.  87. 


194  CIIUISTOLOGY. 

womb  of  Mary  the  substance  which  became  the  human  na- 
ture of  Christ;  b)  dytufrriKT^'  or  sanctificativa,  for  the  Holy 
Ghost  cleansed  from  sin  and  sanctified  the  substance  of 
which  the  body  of  the  Son  of  (Jod  was  formed;  c)  TtAetom/cT^ 
or  cotijunctiva,  which  denotes  the  mysterious  union  by 
which  the  eternal  Logos  was  indissolubly  united  with  the 
nature  formed  and  sanctified  by  the  Holy  Ghost.  And  yet, 
although  Christ  was  conceived  by  the  Holy  Ghost,  still  we 
cannot  say  that  the  Holy  Ghost  is  the  Father  of  Christ.  It 
was  not  an  cTreAeno-is  a-rrepixaTLKii ,  SO  that  the  Holy  Ghost  was  a 
spermatic  cause.  The  cleansing  of  the  natural  substance 
from  sin  is  furthermore  explained  through  the  activity  of 
the  divine  nature.*  The  following  passages  may  be  quoted 
concerning  the  activity  of  the  Spirit  and  the  incarnation 
of  the  Son:  "And  the  angel  answered  and  said  unto  her, 
The  Holy  Spirit  shall  come  upon  thee,  and  the  power  of  the 
Most  High  shall  overshadow  thee:  wherefore  also  the  holy 
thing  which  is  begotten  shall  be  called  the  Son  of  God" 
(Luke  1 :  35)  ;  "When  his  mother  Mary  had  been  betrothed 
to  Joseph,  before  they  came  together  she  was  found  with 
child  of  the  Holy  Spirit"  (Matt.  1:  18)  ;  "And  without  con- 

*  In  the  Creeds  of  the  Church  we  confess  that  Christ  was  conceived 
by  the  Holy  Ghost.  This  was  not  an  ordinary,  but  an  extraordinary 
and  absolutely  miraculous  conception.  We  also  confess  Him  "born  of 
the  Virgin  Mary,"  which  emphasizes  the  supernatural  in  the  event. 
The  correct  translation  of  Luke  1:  35  in  rendering  it  the  Holy  Spirit 
supports  the  Confession.  Spirit  (compare  the  original)  has  the  em- 
phatic position  which  makes  it  more  definite  without  the  article.  The 
indefinite  translation  'Holy  Spirit'  only  serves  the  exegesis  of  Nes- 
torians,  Kenotics  and  Dorner.  While  it  is  impossible  to  explain  the 
supernatural  conception,  it  is  evident  that  the  Holy  Spirit  was  active 
in  a  supernatural  manner  to  segregate  the  cell,  purify  it  from  inherited 
sin  in  the  physico-psychical  propagation  and  at  the  very  same  instant 
conjoin  the  human  and  divine  nature,  the  latter  as  Logos  at  the  same 
moment  assuming  human  nature  actively  and  not  passively.  The  Son 
of  God  did  not  assume  human  nature  as  entire,  but  a  human  nature 
as  separated  by  the  Holy  Spirit  and  possessing  all  that  belongs  to 
human  nature  except  sin.  The  personalization  took  place  in  the  same 
act,  the  result  being  the  God-man  and  not  a  man-God.  Compare  the 
following  passages:  "God,  sending  his  own  Son  in  the  likeness  of  sin- 
ful flesh,"  Rom.  8:  3;  "The  Holy  Spirit  shall  come  upon  thee  (concep- 
tion), and  the  power  of  the  Most  High  shall  overshadow  thee  (Logos)," 
Luke  1:  35;  "And  the  Word  became  flesh,"  John  1:  14.  —  The  Roman 
Catholic  Church  attempted  to  establish  the  sinlessness  of  Christ  by  the 
doctrine  of  the  Immaculate  Conception  of  the  Virgin  Mary.    Pope  Pius 


THE    NECESSITY    AND    THE   REALITY   OF   THE    GOD-MAN.  195 

troversy  great  is  the  mystery  of  godliness;  he  who  was 
manifested  in  the  flesh,  justified  in  the  spirit"  (1  Tim.  3: 
16)  ;  "Since  then  the  children  are  sharers  in  flesh  and 
blood,  he  also  himself  in  like  manner  partook  of  the  same" 
(Heb.  2:  14)  ;  ''Yet  without  sin"  (Heb.  4:  15). 

4.    Concerning  the  Divinity  of  Jesus. 

The  incarnation  being  necessary,  the  gracious  will  of  God 
required  that  it  also  should  be  realized.  All  the  proofs  in- 
dicate and  make  clear  that  the  incarnation  of  the  Son  of 
God  or  His  assumption  of  human  nature  was  carried  into 
effect  through  the  appearance  of  Jesus  Christ.  The  incar- 
nation is  therefore  an  historical  fact. 

The  ordinary  proofs  for  the  divinity  of  Jesus  are  the  fol- 
lowing: 1)  argumentuyn  ovo/xao-rtKoV  or  that  divine  names 
are  ascribed  to  Him;  "This  (Jesus  Christ)  is  the  true  God 
and  eternal  life"  (1  John  5:  20)  ;  2)  arguynentumlSLWfjiaTiKov 
or  that  divine  attributes  are  ascribed  to  Him ;  "Jesus  came 
to  them  and  spake  unto  them,  saying.  All  authority  hath 
been  given  unto  me  in  heaven  and  on  earth"  (Matt.  28 :  18)  ; 
cf.  John  17:  3;  17:  24,  etc.;  3)  argimientum  évepyrjTiKov 
or  that  divine  deeds  are  ascribed  to  Him;  "All  things  have 

IX.  (infallible  ex  cathedra,  as  officially  decreed  in  1870)  declared  at 
a  Convention  in  1854  that  the  Virgin  Mary  was,  in  the  first  instant  of 
her  conception,  preserved  free  from  every  stain  of  original  sin.  —  It  is 
idle  to  discuss  whether  or  not  Jesus  was  born  clauso  utero  Virginis, 
which  would  be  a  miracle.  No  Lutheran  would  deny  the  possibility, 
while  a  Calvinist,  rejecting  the  Communicatio  idiomatum,  would  be 
forced  to  teach  aperto  utero,  but  it  is  not  based  on  Scripture  passages. 
The  Scriptures  teach  plainly  that  Jesus  was  born  of  a  virgin,  and  her 
virginity  was  destroyed  neither  morally  nor  physically  by  the  changes 
connected  with  pregnancy  and  the  natural  birth.  —  Another  question, 
perhaps  also  idle,  or  at  least  curious,  is  discussed  by  theologians, 
namely,  why  the  Second  Person  in  the  Trinity  became  man,  and  not 
the  First  or  the  Third.  The  following  answers  may  be  adequate:  The 
First  Person,  being  the  Father,  it  was  most  fitting  that  the  Father 
should  send  the  Son  and  not  the  Son  the  Father;  it  was  most  suitable 
that  in  the  incarnation  the  relation  of  the  three  should  remain  as  be- 
fore; it  was  also  proper  that  He  by  whom  all  things  were  made  was  to 
be  the  Mediator  to  bring  the  lost  back  to  God;  and  it  was  also  fitting 
that  the  Spirit  was  not  incarnated,  but  that  He,  proceeding  from  the 
Father  and  the  Son  in  the  ontological  relation,  was  sent  by  the  Father 
and  the  Son  to  apply  salvation.  It  was  wonderful  love  that  prompted 
the  Son  to  become  man  to  suffer  and  die  for  the  salvation  and  redemp- 
tion of  man. 


196  CnRISTOLOGY. 

been  created  through  him,  and  in  him  all  things  consist" 
(Col.  1:  16,  17)  ;  cf.  John  1:3;  John  5:  20,  21;  Matt.  9:  6, 
etc.;  4)  argumentum  XarptvriKÖv  or  that  divine  worship  is 
ascribed  unto  Him;  "That  all  may  honor  the  Son,  even  as 
they  honor  the  Father"  (John  5:  23)  ;  cf.  Phil.  2:  10,  11; 
5)  argumentum  åvTo^iapTvpr^TiKÖv  XpiaTov  or  the  testimony  of 
Jesus  Christ  Himself  concerning  His  divinity.  Note  the 
following  passages:  "The  P^ather  loveth  the  Son,  and  hath 
given  all  things  into  his  hand"  (John  3:  35)  ;  "I  that  speak 
unto  thee  am  he"  (John  4 :  26)  ;  "Before  Abraham  was  born 
I  am"  (John  8:  58)  ;  cf.  John  17,  etc.;  "And  they  all  said, 
Art  thou  then  the  Son  of  God?  And  he  said  unto  them,  Ye 
say  that  I  am"  (Luke  22:  70).  Many  other  passages  bear 
directly  or  indirectly  upon  the  same  subject.  The  testi- 
monies of  Christ  Himself  possess  great  significance,  inas- 
much as  He  was  an  intellectual,  truthful,  unselfish,  meek 
and  holy  man,  even  when  considered  from  the  merely  hu- 
man point  of  view.  Even  His  enemies  have  acknowledged 
that  His  character  was  spotless,  that  He  was  the  ideal  man, 
and  that  He  was  elevated  far  above  all  selfish  aspirations. 
A  good  man  would  not  have  borne  such  testimony  of  him- 
self, had  it  not  been  true.  It  is  plainly  evident  that  a  sinful 
man  never  would  have  spoken  as  He  did.  He  presented 
the  truth  boldly  and  uncompromisingly.  He  never  sought 
popular  favor  and  played  no  political  role.  His  words  and 
manner  never  indicate  any  mental  aberration.  His  words 
always  convey  thoughts  of  profound  wisdom.  However 
critically  considered,  He  was  perfectly  normal.  In  His  ap- 
pearance and  speech  there  was  something  supernatural,  but 
nothing  abnormal.  Every  unprejudiced  thinker  who  loves 
the  truth  must  therefore  acknowledge  the  testimonies  of 
Christ  concerning  His  divinity  as  the  best  proofs  of  His 
divine  origin. 

5.    Concerning  the  Humanity  of  Jesus  Christ. 

Jesus  Christ  was  not  only  true  God,  but  also  true  man. 
Proofs  for  the  true  humanity  of  Jesus  have  been  presented 
against  the  advocates  of  Docetism  and  other  related  theo- 


THE   NECESSITY   AND   THE  REALITY   OF  THE  GOD-MAN.  197 

ries,  definitions  have  been  formulated  in  order  to  forestall 
misleading  conceptions,  while  the  special  prerogatives  of 
the  human  nature  of  Christ  have  been  set  forth  in  order  to 
counteract  Nestorian  and  rationalistic  tendencies  as  well 
as  for  the  purpose  of  making  clear  the  pure  and  harmonious 
character  of  Christ  as  Mediator.  We  would  herewith  pre- 
sent more  precisely  the  content  of  these  considerations 
which  have  such  great  bearing  on  the  development  of  the 
doctrine  of  the  humanity  of  Jesus. 

1)  The  ordinary  proofs  for  the  true  humanity  of  Jesus 
are  the  following:  a)  argiimentum  ex  nommibiis  humanis, 
or  the  proof  on  the  ground  of  the  human  names  of  Jesus ; 
''A  man  that  hath  told  you  the  truth"  (John  8:  40)  ;  "Man, 
Jesus  Christ"  (1  Tim.  2:5);  "Is  not  this  the  carpenter's 
son?  is  not  his  mother  called  Mary?  and  his  brethren, 
James,  and  Joseph,  and  Simon,  and  Judas?"  (Matt.  13:  55)  ; 

b)  argumentum  ex  partihus  hominis  essentialibus,  or  proofs 
gathered  from  such  passages  as  mention  that  He  possessed 
body,  soul,  spirit,  emotion,  knowledge,  will,  etc. ;  "The  tem- 
ple of  his  body"  (John  2:  21)  ;  "My  soul  is  exceedingly  sor- 
rowful" (Matt.  26:  38)  ;  "Yielded  up  his  spirit"  (Matt.  27: 
50)  ;  cf.  also  Luke  2:  52;  John  11:  35;  Matt.  26:  39,  etc.; 

c)  argumentum  ex  operationihiis  humanis,  or  proofs  on  the 
ground  of  His  human  deeds,  such  as  that  He  taught,  con- 
versed, journeyed,  etc.;  d)  argiimentum  ex  attributis  vero 
homini  propriis,  such  as  hunger,  thirst,  fatigue,  sleep,  etc. : 
e)  argumentum  ex  genealogia  Christi  according  to  Matt.  1 
and  Luke  3. 

2)  Designations  ascribed  to  the  humanity  of  Jesus  are: 
a)  vera,  or  true,  which  term  is  used  against  Docetism  and 
other  related  theories;  b)  completa,  or  perfect,  which  term 
is  used  against  Apollinaris  and  others,  and  against  Mono- 
teletism ;  c)  homousia,  or  of  the  same  essence  with  us  in 
accordance  with  His  humanity,  which  is  used  against 
Gnosticism  and  against  Schwenkfeld. 

3)  Concerning  the  natural  and  personal  human  infirmi- 
ties it  is  taught  that  Christ  assumed  infirmitas  naturales, 
such  as  hunger,  thirst,  fatigue,  trials,  etc.,  but  He  did  not 


198  CIIKISTOLOGY. 

assume  infirmitates  persojiales,  because  these  latter  denote 
imperfection  in  formation,  from  which  are  derived  de- 
formities and  hereditary  sicknesses.  The  assumption  of 
these  would  not  have  served  any  purpose,  and  at  the  same 
time  would  have  detracted  from  His  human  dignity. 

4)  Py-serogativa  hiimanse  Christi  natur se,  or  the  spe- 
cial prerogatives  of  the  human  nature  of  Christ,  are:  a) 
ävviro(jTaa-ia .  By  this  is  meant  that  the  human  nature  did  not 
exist  per  se  as  a  special  personality  which  was  assumed  in 
the  act  of  incarnation,  since  in  that  case  there  would  have 
been  two  persons  and  two  mediators  and  not  two  natures 
in  one  person.  The  human  nature,  therefore,  lacked  per- 
sonality, but  became  personal  by  being  made  partaker  in 
the  personality  of  the  Son  of  God,  which  is  called  IvvTroaTaa-ia. 
There  M^as  no  separation  in  time  so  that  the  human  nature 
of  Christ  should  have  lacked  the  elements  of  personality 
even  for  a  moment.  At  exactly  the  same  moment  that  the 
human  nature  through  the  divine  activity  came  into  ex- 
istence, it  was  made  partaker  in  the  most  real  and  perfect 
way  in  the  personality  of  the  Son  of  God;  b)  ttm/xapr^o-ta, 
or  that  the  assumed  nature  was  sinless;  c)  singularis  animse 
et  corporis  excellentia,  denoting  a  singular  measure  of  un- 
derstanding, will  and  emotion,  Cf .  Luke  2 :  47 ;  John  7 :  46. 
His  body  constituted  a  harmonious  organism.  He  was  im- 
mortal and  died  therefore  of  His  own  free  will,  for  which 
reason  He  did  not  see  corruption.  His  form  and  appearance 
were  perfect  and  beautiful.  Cf .  Ps.  45  :  3 :  "Thou  art  fairer 
than  the  children  of  men."  Isa.  53  refers  to  Christ  in  the 
garb  of  His  suffering.  Christ  was  normal  in  all  things. 
Even  in  His  appearance  He  was  the  ideal  man.  It  is  not 
necessary  to  think  of  Him  as  wearing  a  heavenly  halo.  His 
appearance  was  that  of  men  in  general,  although  His  ex- 
ternal features  undoubtedly  expressed  something  of  the 
inward  purity  of  His  spirit.  Even  Pilate  was  captivated 
by  His  personality. 

In  regard  to  the  second  point  touching  upon  the  impec- 
cability and  temptability  of  Christ  we  must  consider  that 
the  divine  nature  by  itself  could  not  be  tempted,  but  when 


THE   NECESSITY   AND   THE  REALITY   OF   THE   GOI>-MAN.  199 

the  divine  and  human  natures  are  by  the  incarnation  united 
in  one  theanthropic  person,  temptation'  is  possible.  But  His 
sinlessness  does  not  lessen  the  reality  of  His  temptation  by 
Satan.  The  g:ood  angels  were  tempted  and  our  first  parents 
were  tempted  in  their  state  of  innocence.  But  it  was  im- 
possible for  Christ  to  fall  a  prey  to  Satan's  wiles,  and  yet 
He  could  suffer  the  anguish  of  soul  and  the  internal  struggle 
of  temptation  to  the  utmost.  This  experience  belonged  to 
His  suffering.  We  must  consider  that  He  was  in  the  state 
of  exinanition  and,  therefore,  the  experience  of  temptation 
was  real.  Being  sinless.  He  was  endowed  with  enlighten- 
ment in  the  understanding,  purity  in  the  feeling  and  holi- 
ness in  the  will  and  therefore  felt  the  attack  of  Satan  all 
the  more  keenly.  If  an  enemy  attacks  a  strong  fortress, 
like  Gibraltar,  the  bombardment  will  be  corrsepondingly 
heavy.  The  temptation  of  Christ  was  evidently  the  severest 
that  Satan  was  able  to  plan  and  execute.  The  reason  that 
Christ  could  not  fall  depends  upon  the  fact  that  the  divine 
nature  would  not  leave  the  human  nature  to  itself  in  mo- 
ments of  special  danger.  In  the  state  of  exinanition  the 
divine  nature  ordinarily  withdrew  from  the  human  nature 
the  use  of  omniscience  and  other  relative  attributes  and  the 
(lOd-man  was  left  to  suffer  desertion  by  God  in  His  experi- 
ence of  hell,  but  would  never  have  been  left  to  fall.  He  had 
been  sent  to  suffer  and  die  vicariously  to  save  men.  Ac- 
cording to  Heb.  5:  8,  He  learned  obedience  by  the  things 
which  He  suffered,  and  He  was  the  more  able  to  help  those 
who  experience  temptation.  The  fact  that  the  Second  Per- 
son in  the  Trinity  has  Himself  passed  through  all  kinds  of 
trials  and  the  hardest  sufferings  and  death  possesses  great 
consolation  for  every  Christian. 

6.    Notes  on  the  History  of  Dogma. 

In  the  earliest  period  the  doctrine  of  the  Christian  Church 
was  in  danger  through  influences  both  from  Judaism  and 
heathenism.  There  were  two  kinds  of  heresy  that  arose 
from  Judaism.  We  refer  to  those  of  the  Ebionites  and  the 
Nazareans.    The  former  considered  Christ  only  a  man  who 


200  CHRISTOLOGY. 

had  been  consecrated  as  Messiah  at  His  baptism.  The  lat- 
ter acknowledged  the  supernatural  birth  of  Christ,  but 
denied  His  hypostatical  pre-existence.  They  considered 
that  at  the  baptism  of  Christ  God  united  Himself  with  the 
human  personality  as  it  had  been  fashioned  by  the  Spirit 
of  God.  There  was  also  a  Greek  Ebionitism  which  was  pan- 
theistic in  character.  According  to  this  theory  the  human 
nature  of  Christ  was  considered  divine,  which  from  the 
practical  point  of  view  simply  meant  that  He  was  a  great 
genius.  Gnosticism  arose  through  the  influence  of  hea- 
thenism. Among  its  representatives  we  would  mention 
Basilides,  Valentinus  and  Marcion.  Gnosticism  also  im- 
plied Docetism.  The  Church  was  also  compelled  to  fight 
against  the  Monarchians,  Apollinarism,  and  other  tenden- 
cies. AVhile  Origen  was  heretical  in  many  things,  he  never- 
theless advocated  the  eternal  generation  of  the  Son.  Among 
the  many  doctrinal  controversies  we  would  make  mention 
of  the  struggle  against  Arius  and  the  different  forms  of 
Arianism.  During  the  second  period  there  arose  the  con- 
troversy between  the  Nestorians  and  the  School  of  Alex- 
andria, of  which  Cyril  was  the  representative.  The  Alex- 
andrian School  emphasized  the  union  of  the  natures  of 
Christ,  while  the  Nestorians,  on  the  other  hand,  separated 
them,  resulting  in  two  persons.  Eutyches  laid  such  em- 
phasis on  the  union  of  the  natures  as  to  result  in  only  one 
nature.  At  the  Council  of  Chalcedon  in  451  it  was  decided 
that  the  two  natures  were  united  inconfusedly  (do-vyxi'rws), 
unchangeably  (dTpeVrws),  indivisibly  ( dSiaipcVws )  and  insep- 
arably ( dxwpt'o-Tws ) .  At  the  same  Council  the  following  was 
adopted:  "We  confess. that  He  is  truly  God  and  truly  Man, 
of  a  reasonable  soul  and  body ;  consubstantial  with  the  Fa- 
ther, according  to  the  Godhead,  and  consubstantial  with  us, 
according  to  the  Manhood ;  in  all  things  like  unto  us,  except 
sin."  Several  attempts  were  made  to  unite  the  Monophy- 
sites  with  the  Church.  Among  such  attempts  may  be  men- 
tioned the  one  made  by  Emperor  Heraclius  together  with 
the  patriarchs  Sergius  in  Constantinople  and  Cyrus  in  Alex- 
andria.    Through  this  attempt  there  arose  the  heresy  of 


THE   NECESSITY    AND    THE   REALITY    OF   THE   GOD-MAN.  201 

Monotheletism,  which  was  condemned  at  Rome  in  649  and 
at  Constantinople  in  680.  In  the  West  there  arose  a  doc- 
trinal tendency  known  as  Adoptionism,  which  set  forth  a 
double  sonship.  Peter  Lombard  developed  a  new  doctrine 
which  has  become  known  as  Nihilism.  The  Roman  Catholic 
Church  sought  to  effect  a  compromise  between  the  different 
tendencies.  The  doctrines  of  this  Church  overshadow  the 
humanity  of  Christ  not  only  by  laying  special  emphasis  on 
the  divine,  but  also  through  the  worship  of  the  saints,  the 
mass  and  the  exaltation  of  the  Virgin  Mary,  who  through 
her  intercession  represents  the  divine  love  in  human  form. 
During  the  following  period,  or  the  period  of  the  Reforma- 
tion, the  Lutheran  Church  devoted  itself  to  the  most  thor- 
oughgoing study  and  treatment  of  the  Christological  ques- 
tion, which  reached  its  culmination  in  the  logical  doctrine 
of  communicatio  idiomatum.  The  Reformed  Church  laid 
emphasis  on  the  expression,  "finitum  non  est  capax  infiniti," 
in  accordance  with  which  the  union  of  the  two  natures  is 
not  real,  except  in  the  sense  that  it  is  the  same  person  that 
is  active  at  times  through  the  one  and  at  other  times  through 
the  other  nature.  Such  a  position  is  related  to  Nestorianism. 
The  Reformed  view  is  often  expressed  in  the  same  language 
as  the  Lutheran,  but  the  content  is  not  the  same.  The  Re- 
formed doctrine  of  communicatio  idiomatum  makes  this 
clear.  During  the  Protestant  Scholastic  period  there  arose 
many  Docetic  tendencies,  as  in  Schwenkfeld  and  Weigel, 
while  other  tendencies  set  forth  only  the  human  nature  of 
Christ,  such  as  Socinianism.  Servetus  rejected  the  doc- 
trine of  the  two  natures  of  Christ  as  well  as  the  eternal 
existence  of  a  personal  Son  of  God.  This  period  was  also 
characterized  by  a  still  more  profound  development  of  the 
Lutheran  Christology.  During  the  following  period,  which 
includes  the  modern  critical  development,  there  arose  as  a 
result  of  Deism  and  the  philosophical  schools  of  the  day  the 
modern  development  of  Rationalism,  which  considers  Jesus 
as  simply  a  man.  Kant  laid  stress  on  Christ  from  the  prac- 
tical and  moral  point  of  view,  while  it  became  more  and 
more   customary  to   look   upon   Christ  as  the   ideal   man. 


202  CHBISTOLOGY. 

Schleiermacher  presents  the  doctrine  of  the  ideal  man  and 
reallj'  rejects  the  doctrine  of  the  divinity  of  Christ,  although 
in  a  pantheistic  way  he  recognizes  Christ  as  divine.  Christ 
was  the  God-man  as  the  highest  development  of  humanity. 
And  yet,  although  the  school  of  Schleiermacher  and  Hegel 
have  undermined  the  faith  in  the  true  divinity  of  Christ, 
still  the  orthodox  doctrines  have  had  many  powerful  de- 
fenders. The  iconoclastic  theology  of  Ritschl  has  won  many 
adherents  in  our  modern  day.  This  theology  robs  Christ 
of  essential  union  with  the  Father.  The  expression  "Son  of 
God"  is  used,  but  not  in  the  sense  that  the  Church  teaches. 
In  reality  Ritschlianism  denies  the  divinity  of  Christ.  But 
while  this  destructive  theology  has  exerted  great  influence, 
still  it  bears  within  its  own  heart  the  seeds  of  self-destruc- 
tion. The  old  truth  shall  conquer.  We  would  herewith  as 
before  give  a  more  detailed  resumé  of  the  ideas  and  concep- 
tions that  have  characterized  different  tendencies  as  well 
as  the  views  of  the  leading  men  during  the  various  periods 
of  development. 

Clement  of  Rome  calls  Christ  the  effulgence  of  the  Father,  while 
he  calls  the  suffering  of  Christ  the  suffering  of  God.  Barnabas  taught 
the  pre-existence  of  Christ.  Ignatius  says  that  Christ  is  God  who  be- 
came man.  He  calls  His  blood  the. blood  of  God.  Cerintiii's,  whom 
John,  according  to  Polycarp,  considered  a  heretic,  taught  the  opposite, 
declaring  that  Jesus  was  a  man  who  had  received  the  aeon  Christ  at  his 
baptism.     This  Christ  left  Jesus  before  His  suffering. 

Justin  Martyr  taught  that  the  Logos  was  a  potency  that  had  existed 
eternally  in  the  Father,  but  appeared  as  a  hypostasis  at  the  creation 
of  the  world  and  was  then  born  out  of  the  essence  of  the  Father.  He 
therefore  taught  the  birth  of  the  Son.  This  Son  of  God  assumed  man- 
hood. Justin  therefore  did  not  teach  that  the  Son  was  born  of  eternity, 
but  that  the  birth  of  the  Son  was  dependent  upon  the  will  of  the  Father. 
Atiienagoras  partly  followed  the  conception  of  Justin,  but  nevertheless 
considered  that  the  Son  was  an  eternal  hypostasis  in  the  Father. 
Among  the  Monarchians  may  be  mentioned  first  the  Alogians.  who 
rejected  the  doctrine  of  the  Logos  as  contained  in  John's  Gospel  and 
taught  that  the  Logos  was  not  a  divine  hypostasis  as  distinct  from  the 
Father.  We  would  further  mention  the  dynamic  Monarchians,  such  as 
Theodotus  the  Tanner,  Theodotus  the  Money-changer,  and  Artemon. 
who  taught  that  it  was  only  a  divine  power  that  was  imparted  to 
Jesus,  who  had  been  brought  forth  by  the  Holy  Ghost  and  the  Virgin 


THE   NECESSITY   AND   THE  REALITY  OF   THE  GOD-MAN.  203 

Mary.  Later  on  Paul  of  Samosata  further  developed  the  teachings 
of  the  Monarchians.  There  were  other  Monarchians,  the  so-called 
Patripassians,  who  taught  that  the  only  person  in  the  Godhead,  or  the 
Father  Himself,  had  become  man  and  suffered  for  the  sins  of  the 
world.  Among  these  may  be  mentioned  Peaxeas,  Noötus  and  Beryllus. 
The  third  form  of  Monarcliianism  was  the  so-called  Modalistic  Monarch- 
ianism,  which  in  developed  form  is  called  Sabellianism.  Sabelltus 
taught  that  per  se  Ood  was  a  unity  that  was  impersonal  and  admitted 
of  no  distinctions.  In  the  course  of  the  world's  development  this 
unity  appeared  in  three  different  modes  or  forms,  each  constituting, 
however,  the  whole  monad.  The  Godhead,  which  is  fixed  and  stable, 
reveals  itself  in  three  different  phases  of  development,  so  that  the 
Father,  the  Son  and  the  Holy  Spirit  exist  successively  in  the  concrete, 
but  it  is  the  same  God.  —  Gnosticism,  flourished  during  the  second 
century  and  was  represented  by  Basilides,  Valentinus  and  Marcion. 
The  system  of  Basilides  contained  among  other  things  the  following: 
The  nameless  God  through  His  creative  word  first  produces  a  world 
embryo  or  chaos,  from  which  the  world  develops.  In  this  embryo 
there  are  found  three  sons,  the  pneumatic,  the  psychic  and  the  hylic. 
The  first  of  these  liberates  himself  instantly  from  the  embryo  and 
arises  with  lightning  rapidity  to  God  and  remains  there  as  the  blessed 
world  of  the  spirit  or  TrXrjpoijxa,  which  constitutes  the  seven  highest 
aeons,  and  together  with  the  primitive  being  forms  the  first  Ogdoad. 
The  emanations  continued  and  there  arose  365  spiritual  worlds.  The 
second  Son  with  the  help  of  the  Holy  Spirit,  whom  He  has  produced, 
endeavors  to  follow  the  pneumatic  son,  but  reaches  no  further  than 
the  border-line  of  the  TrXrjpw/xa  or  the  firmament.  The  third  son  is 
caught  in  the  embryo  and  stands  in  need  of  redemption.  Two  apxovTe<; 
or  SrjixLovpyoL  are  created  which  proceed  from  the  world  substance. 
The  first  ap)(^(Dv  creates  the  firmament,  the  second  creates  and  rules 
the  planetary  heavens.  Both  the  archontes  bear  sons  who  arise  and 
bring  unto  their  father  knowledge  mediated  through  the  Holy  Spirit, 
leading  him  to  repentance.  This  is  the  beginning  of  the  process  of 
redemption  by  which  the  children  of  God  or  the  pneumatics  are  to  be 
brought  back  to  the  supramundane  God.  Christianity  is  the  means. 
Christ  is  threefold.  He  is  the  son  of  the  first  apxm',  also  of  the 
second,  as  well  as  the  son  of  Mary.  It  is  the  same  principle.  The 
body  of  Christ  returned  to  formlessness  at  death.  His  soul  arose  and 
ascended,  but  stopped  in  the  planetary  heavens.  His  spirit  ascended 
to  the  first  son  and  the  primitive  being.  The  threefold  pneumatic 
principle  attracts  all  spiritual  beings  by  which  redemption  is  accom- 
plished. The  system  of  Valentinus  contains  briefly  the  following  main 
points:  The  primary  substance  is  Bnöos  which  is  inscrutable  and 
throughout  limitless  ages  lives  in  silent  contemplation  of  his  own 
perfection.     This  silence  or   rj  o-Lyq  is  the  spouse  of  Bythos  and  consti- 


204  CHRISTOLOGY. 

tutes  the  feminine  principle.  After  the  silence  begins  the  evolution. 
The  first  to  be  born  are  vov<;  and  aXy'/deiu,  which  in  turn  bear  Aoyos  and 
Coirj,  and  these  in  their  turn  bear  ävOpwTro<;  and  eKKkrjaia.  The  first  pair 
bring  forth  ten  aeons  and  the  second  pair  twelve.  The  last  or  the 
28th  aeon  is  called  aocfyia.  Thereafter  the  first  pair  also  brought  forth 
the  heavenly  Christ  and  the  feminine  Holy  Spirit.  2o<j!)(a  forms  the 
transition  to  the  lower  world.  The  thirty  aeons  together  constitute 
TrXripdifxa,  for  which  a  boundary  is  fixed  when  Br^öos  gives  birth  to  opos, 
liO(f>La  longs  for  the  primitive  being  and  at  once  plunges  into  the  Bvdo^ 
and  then  chaos  arises.  "Opo?  prevents  her  destruction,  bringing  her 
back  and  releasing  from  her  Trä6o<i,  who  sinks  down  in  Kivojxa  and 
constitutes  the  lower  ao^ia  or  Akamoth.  The  whole  world  of  aeons 
sympathized  with  this  aeon  who  belonged  nevertheless  to  the  7rA.7;/3w/x.a. 
For  this  reason  the  aeons  were  brought  forth  that  were  to  accomplish 
redemption,  viz.,  the  heavenly  Christ  and  the  Holy  Spirit.  The  thirty 
aeons  together  brought  forth  awTr'ip  or  Jesus  as  a  spouse  to  ao^ia. 
The  Demiurge,  who  had  created  the  sensuous,  also  brought  forth  a 
lower  Christ  with  whom  o-ionjp  was  united  at  His  baptism.  This  lower 
Christ  had  passed  through  the  womb  of  Mary  like  water  through  a 
pipe,  but  had  no  real  body.  He  was  crucified,  but  did  not  suffer.  After 
many  sufferings  (ro(f>ia  is  purified  and  as  the  bride  of  aoyr-qp  is  brought 
to  TrXripMp.a  and  brings  all  the  pneumatic  spirits  with  her.  Marcion 
accepted  two  principles,  viz.,  the  highest  God  and  the  Demiurge,  the 
God  of  the  Jews.  The  former  was  the  good  God,  the  latter  was  the 
angry  God  which  was  connected  with  the  material.  The  Son  of  God 
without  any  preparation  had  suddenly  come  in  a  phantom  body  and 
without  having  come  in  contact  with  the  body  of  Mary.  He  revealed 
the  good  God.  Iren.^us  taught  that  the  Son  had  co-existed  with  the 
Father  from  eternity.  He  believed  that  there  was  an  intimate  union 
between  the  two  natures.  He  further  believed  that  Logos  would  have 
become  man,  even  if  sin  had  not  come  into  the  world.  He  said  that 
Logos  rested  when  Jesus  suffered.  Tkimulliax  set  forth  a  threefold 
sonship  or  filiatio.  He  wavered  somewhat  in  his  expressions  con- 
cerning the  humanity  of  Christ,  but  he  was  a  powerful  opponent  of 
Docetism.  Against  Marcion  he  declared  that  Christ  could  not  have 
appeared  suddenly  and  without  preparation.  Origex  taught  the  eternal 
generation  of  the  Son.  He  called  Christ  the  God-man  or  at  least  he 
conceived  of  Him  as  a  divine-human  person.  He  said  that  Christ  had 
a  human  soul,  but  on  the  ground  of  his  theory  of  the  pre-existence  of 
souls  he  declared  that  the  Logos  had  united  Himself  to  the  soul  of 
Jesus  before  time  was.  For  this  reason  he  believed  that  the  Son  of 
God  had  received  from  Mary  a  human  body,  but  not  a  complete  human 
nature.  He  also  taught  subordination.  Concerning  the  body  of  Jesus 
after  His  resurrection  Origen  taught  that  the  human  nature  of  Christ 
was  lost  in  the  essence  of  God,  so  that  Christ  is  not  now  a  man. 


THE  NECESSITY   AND   THE  REALITY  OF  THE  GOD-MAN.  205 

Arxobius  taught  also  that  the  human  nature  of  Christ  consisted  only 
of  His  body.  He  calls  Christ  Deus  sublimus.  •  Arius  presented  the 
same  idea,  viz.,  that  at  His  incarnation  the  Son  had  assumed  a  human 
body  without  a  soul.  He  taught  that  there  was  a  time  when  the  Son 
did  not  exist.  It  was  not  necessary  for  the  Son  to  be  born.  God  is  an 
absolute  causality.  The  Son  was  created  out  of  nothing  and  is  not  of 
the  same  essence  with  the  Father.  The  logical  sequence  of  Arianism 
was  developed  by  the  Heterusians.  The  Semiarians  were  represented 
by  Basil  of  Ancyra  and  George  of  Laodicea,  who  used  the  term 
o/xotouo-ios.  EusEBius  OF  C.ESAREA  Said  that  the  Father  was  before  the 
Son  as  to  cause  and  that  the  generation  did  not  take  place  in  one  act 
and  therefore  it  was  not  from  eternity.  The  Son  was  God  in  a  sec- 
ondary sense.  Marcellus  denied  the  hypostatical  pre-existence  of  the 
Son.  Only  through  the  incarnation  did  the  Logos  become  personal  and 
the  Son  of  God.  Hilary  of  Poitip:rs  taught  that  the  human  soul  of 
Christ  was  like  ours,  although  it  was  created  directly  by  God;  also 
that  His  human  nature,  formed  by  the  flesh  of  Mary,  was  like  unto 
ours.  He  set  forth  three  acts  of  generation,  the  first  was  the  eternal 
generation  of  the  Father,  the  second  was  the  incarnation,  and  the 
third  was  the  resurrection.  The  human  nature  of  Christ  was  made 
divine  after  the  resurrection.  Athanasius  laid  emphasis  on  the  in- 
timate relationship  between  the  two 'natures  of  Christ.  He  not  only 
fought  Arianism,  but  also  Apollinarism,  stressing  against  the  latter 
the  true  human  nature  of  Christ.  Gregory  of  Nazianzus  and  Gregory 
OF  Nyssa  emphasized  the  union  of  the  natures  and  used  the  term 
(Tuy/cpao-ts.  The  Alexandrian  School  set  forth  the  union,  but  the 
Antiochian  School  distinguished  between  the  natures  of  Christ.  Apol- 
LiNARis  did  not  accept  the  views  of  the  latter,  for  he  said  that  there 
was  only  one  nature  in  Christ,  which  had  a  divine  and  a  human  side. 
He  taught  further  that  God  and  a  complete  man  could  not  be  united 
in  one  person,  for  which  reason  he  declared  that  Christ  lacked  the 
human  spirit.  This  was  necessary,  inasmuch  as  the  seat  of  sin  was  in 
the  spirit.  Diodorus  of  Tarsus  said  that  the  union  between  the  two 
natures  was  not  substantial  but  moral.  Toward  the  close  of  the  fourth 
century  the  Priscillianists  appeared  in  Spain.  They  declared  that  the 
devil  was  an  independent  ruler.  The  souls  of  men  were  brought 
forth  by  the  good  eternal  being.  They  descended  in  order  to  conquer 
Satan.  But  he  imprisoned  them  in  the  material  body.  When  the  Re- 
deemer came  to  deliver  them,  He  came  with  a  heavenly  body.  This  sect 
advocated  Docetism.  Augustine  rejected  all  Docetic  tendencies  and 
clearly  set  forth  the  teaching  that  Christ  was  God  and  man  in  one 
person.  He  makes  use  of  the  analogy  of  the  union  of  the  soul  with 
the  »body.  The  Christological  controversy  between  the  schools  of 
Antioch  and  Alexandria  reached  its  culmination  when  Nestorius  pre- 
sented  his    doctrine   which   has   become   known   as   Nestorianism.     He 


206  CnUISTOLOGY. 

taught  that  the  incarnation  did  not  consist  in  the  Son  of  God  assuming 
manhood  in  the  womb  of  the  Virgin  Mary,  but  through  the  mediation 
of  the  Holy  Ghost  Mary  had  given  birth  to  a  man  as  an  organ  for  the 
divinity,  in  which  man  the  Logos  had  taken  His  abode  as  in  a  temple. 
The  union  of  the  natures  was  therefore  only  moral.  The  union  was 
considered  as  a  (rwa<^aa.  Mary  was  a  ;i(pi(rTOTOKOs,  but  not  a  öeoroKos 
Cyril  of  Ai.exanduia  rejected  the  doctrine  of  the  communion  of  the 
natures  and  taught  instead  an  cVwcris.  He  used  the  illustration  of  the 
union  of  the  soul  with  the  body.  Logos  united  Himself  with  an  im- 
personal human  nature.  He  called  Mary  Öcotoko?.  Cyril  presented 
partly  the  doctrine  of  communicatio  idioraatum.  The  doctrine  of  Nes- 
torius  was  rejected  at  the  third  Ecumenical  Council  in  Ephesus  in  431. 
EiTYCHEs  was  a  spirited  opponent  of  Nestorianism,  but  went  to  the 
opposite  extreme,  and  his  position  has  been  termed  Eutychianism.  He 
stressed  the  union  to  such  a  degree  that  it  resulted  in  only  one  nature. 
The  human  nature  of  Christ  was  not  like  ours,  but  was  wholly  merged 
in  the  divine.  The  doctrine  of  Eutyches  was  rejected  in  Ephesus  in 
448,  but  w-as  acknowledged  at  the  so-called  Robber  Council  at  Ephesus 
in  449.  His  doctrine  was  condemned  at  Chalcedon  in  451.  Nestorianism 
was  rejected  at  this  same  Council.  The  letter  of  Leo  the  Great  to 
Flavins  exerted  a  great  influence  on  the  decisions  of  this  meeting. 
The  Council  of  Chalcedon  confessed  that  Christ  is  truly  God  and  truly 
man,  of  a  reasonable  soul  and  body;  consubstantial  with  the  Father, 
according  to  the  Godhead,  and  consubstantial  with  us,  according  to  the 
manhood;  in  all  things,  except  sin,  like  unto  us.  It  was  also  stated 
that  He  was  born  of  the  Virgin  Mary,  the  mother  of  God,  according 
to  the  manhood;  that  He  was  one  person  with  two  natures  which 
were  united  inconfusedly,  unchangeably,  indivisibly  and  inseparably. 
Through  the  attempt  to  reconcile  the  Monophysites  there  arose  a  new 
doctrinal  development  known  as  Monotheletism,  which  declared  that 
Christ  was  indeed  possessed  of  two  natures,  but  that  there  was  only 
one  will  and  one  divine  mode  of  activity.  Monotheletism  was  con- 
demned at  Constantinople  in  680  when  it  was  decided  that  in  Christ 
there  were  two  wills  and  modes  of  activity.  The  human  will,  however, 
must  be  thought  of  as  being  subject  to  the  divine  will.  Docetism  was 
revived  in  the  East  through  the  Paulicians,  who  taught  that  the 
Demiurge  kept  the  souls  imprisoned,  but  that  the  good  God  sent  the 
Redeemer,  who  brought  with  Him  from  heaven  a  phantom  body,  which 
passed  through  Mary  as  though  through  a  pipe  without  receiving  any- 
thing. Joii.x  OF  D.vM.\scxs  taught  that  the  Logos  did  not  assume  a 
human  nature  that  was  an  individual  (individium),  which  would  imply 
Nestorianism.  Neither  did  he  conceive  of  the  human  nature  generic- 
ally,  which  would  lead  to  Monophysitism.  Through  the  incarnation 
the  human  nature  of  Christ  was  made  the  recipient  of  real  subsistence. 
The  human  nature  did  not  exist  independently  either  before  or  after 


THE    NECESSITY    AND    THE   REALITY    OF   THE   GOD-MAN.  207 

the  union;  it  was  an  avvTrocrj-acrca  that  became  an  ivvTroaTacrta.  He 
also  speaks  of  a  Tre/oixw/ar/o-ts,  which  is  active  on  the  side  of  the  divine 
nature.  The  basic  lines  of  the  doctrine  of  communicatio  idiomatum 
are  also  to  be  found  in  this  Church  father. 

During  the  following  period  there  arose  a  tendency  that  has  been 
termed  Adoptio^iism.  in  accordance  with  which  there  was  a  double 
sonship  in  Christ.  In  accordance  with  His  divine  nature  He  was, 
strictly  speaking,  the  Son  of  God,  but  in  accordance  with  His  human 
nature  He  was  adopted.  In  the  former  sense  He  was  the  Only  Begot- 
ten, in  the  latter  sense  He  was  the  First  Born.  Elipandus  of  Toledo 
and  Felix  of  Urgellis  were  the  leading  representatives  of  this  doc- 
trine. Felix  of  Urgellis  also  taught  that  Logos  was  united  with  an 
unsanctified  human  nature,  but  Christ  never  committed  any  actual  sin. 
Adoptionism  was  rejected  at  Regensburg  in  792,  in  Frankfort  in  794, 
and  in  Aachen  in  799.  Johx  Scotvs  Erigexa  taught  that  the  Logos 
assumed  human  nature  in  general,  so  that  the  whole  of  humanity  be- 
came deified.  Anselm  presented  the  Son  as  the  prototype  and  in 
general  taught  the  same  as  John  of  Damascus.  The  incarnation  was 
effected  because  sin  had  come  through  one,  and  therefore  salvation 
must  come  through  one  who  could  make  satisfaction.  Peter  Lombard 
taught  that  the  human  nature  of  Christ  did  not  possess  personality 
and  then  drew  the  conclusion  that  the  Son  of  God  did  not  become  any- 
thing when  He  became  man,  because  God  is  unchangeable.  He  con- 
ceived of  the  incarnation  as  an  indumentum  or  that  the  Son  of  God 
was  invested  with  human  nature  without  becoming  man  in  a  real 
sense.  This  view,  denominated  Nihilism,  was  condemned  in  1179. 
Thomas  Aquinas  denied  that  the  Logos  had  become  united  with  the 
whole  race  or  with  all  individuals,  because  it  served  no  purpose  to 
effect  through  many  what  could  be  accomplished  through  one.  Christ 
was  Mediator  in  accordance  with  His  human  nature.  Duns  Scotus 
taught  that  the  Son  of  God  would  have  become  man  irrespective  of 
sin,  because  the  will  of  God  must  be  fulfilled.  John  Wessel  likewise 
taught  that  the  Son  of  God  would  have  assumed  manhood  independent 
of  the  Fall  in  order  to  complete  humanity  as  an  organism.  In  such 
case  Logos  would  have  become  King  in  the  kingdom  of  God,  which 
reaches  its  goal  in  the  world  of  men. 

Litther  clearly  presented  the  true  Christological  position  and  em- 
phasized the  true  manhood  and  divinity  of  Christ  as  well  as  the  union 
of  the  two  natures  in  one  person.  He  taught  communicatio  idiomatum. 
An  important  utterance  in  the  Christology  of  Luther  is  the  following: 
Where  Christ  is,  there  He  is  entire.  Zwingli  considered  the  communi- 
cation of  the  attributes  in  accordance  with  the  doctrine  of  communi- 
catio idiomatum  simply  as  a  figure  of  speech.  Each  nature  has  its 
own  attributes  and  functions  in  its  own  way.  According  to  His  human 
nature  Christ  is  limited  by  space  and  is  therefore  not  omnipresent; 


208  CHRISTOLOGY. 

only  the  divine  nature  can  be  omnipresent.  The  Reformed  Church 
adopted  the  saying:  finitum  non  est  capax  infiniti.  On  the  other  hand, 
Luther  declared  that  natura  humana  capax  est  divinse.  Calvin  stood 
closer  to  Luther  than  to  Zwingli.  He  had  a  deeper  conception  of  com- 
municatio  idiomatum  than  Zwingli.  Although  he  fought  against 
the  Christology  of  Servetus  and  also  that  of  Osiander,  still  he  did  not 
show  any  great  desire  to  delve  too  deeply  into  the  mysteries  of  Chris- 
tology. However,  he  laid  emphasis  on  the  significance  of  genus  apo- 
telesmaticum.  Sciiwenkkelu  asserted  that  the  body  of  Christ  was  not 
taken  from  the  material  world,  but  that  it  came  from  the  essence  of 
God,  for  which  reason  Jesus  was  the  natural  Son  of  God.  The  body 
which  He  received  from  Mary  was  simply  the  external  form.  Weigel 
also  spoke  of  an  invisible  and  a  visible  body;  the  latter  had  been  re- 
ceived from  Mary.  The  Forniuln  of  Concord  presents  clearly  the  doc- 
trine of  the  person  of  Christ  without  swerving  either  to  the  right  or 
to  the  left.  The  doctrine  of  communicatio  idiomatum  is  given  profound 
treatment  in  a  religious  sense  in  relation  to  the  doctrine  of  the  Lord's 
Supper,  while  the  doctrine  of  the  union  of  the  persons  together  with 
its  effects  is  also  included  in  the  same  discussion.  The  Socinians 
declared  that  Jesus  was  merely  a  man,  but  that  He  was  conceived  by 
the  Holy  Ghost,  and  before  He  entered  upon  His  office,  He  was  taken 
up  to  heaven  and  instructed.  As  a  reward  for  His  obedience  He  was 
accorded  divine  attributes  and  worship.  The  Armi7iians  taught  sub- 
ordination and  presented  a  view  which  approached  Nestorianism. 

According  to  Reimarus  and  Lessing  Christ  was  a  wise  and  prudent 
man,  indeed,  they  considered  Him  a  demagogue,  who  endeavored  to 
establish  an  earthly  kingdom.  This  also  to  a  certain  extent  expresses 
the  attitude  of  the  Deists,  who  at  the  most  considered  Jesus  Christ  as 
a  moral  teacher,  comparing  Him  to  Apollonius  of  Tyana.  Kaxt  as- 
serted that  Christ  possessed  significance  merely  as  the  founder  of  a 
church  in  which  the  religion  of  the  intellect  finally  would  conquer. 
He  considered  Christ  as  an  example  and  as  the  ideal  of  moral  perfec- 
tion. The  principal  thing  is  faith  in  the  ideal,  not  in  the  historical 
Christ.  FiCHi-E  said  that  Christ  possessed  the  most  highly  developed 
knowledge  possible  to  man,  viz.,  the  knowledge  of  the  absolute  union 
of  being  as  revealed  in  the  unity  of  man  and  the  divine  essence.  Christ 
does  not  now  possess  any  other  historical  significance  than  that  He 
was  the  person  who  imparted  the  knowledge  of  this  union.  Hegel, 
together  with  the  representatives  of  modern  Pantheism  in  general, 
teaches  that  the  incarnation  is  not  to  be  considered  empirically,  in  the 
sense  that  God  should  have  assumed  human  nature  at  a  certain  time. 
Jesus  was  not,  strictly  speaking,  the  God-man.  The  question  does  not 
concern  the  union  of  God  with  a  particular  man,  but  with  the  whole 
of  humanity.  The  self-consciousness  of  God  is  reached  through  the 
spirit    of    man.      Some    of   Hegel's    disciples    have    endeavored    to    har- 


XJNIO   TKUSOXALIS    AXD   ITS   IJr:\rEDIATR    RKSrLTS.  209 

monize  Hegelianism  with  the  Christian  doctrine  of  an  liistorical  divine- 
human  person,  but  Strauss  has  proved  that  this  is  impossible  from  tlie 
Hegelian  point  of  view.  Strauss  said  that  ideas  are  not  ordinarily 
realized  in  such  manner  that  all  the  wealth  of  their  content  is  poured 
out  in  one  individual  representative,  but  in  the  many.  Humanity  is 
the  divine  form  of  revelation.  Schleiekmacher  considered  Christ  as 
the  greatest  fruit  of  humanity.  The  consciousness  of  the  divine  ap- 
peared in  Him  as  in  no  other.  Christ  was  the  ideal  man,  but  He  was 
not  the  real  Son  of  God.  Schleiermacher  leaned  toward  Sabellianism. 
De  Wette  taught  that  we  transfer  our  religious  emotion  to  Christ  and 
imagine  that  He  forms  the  connecting  link  between  the  infinite  and 
the  finite.  But  divinity  has  not  become  united  with  humanity  in  an 
individual.  Toward  the  close  of  his  life,  however,  h3  gave  stronger 
recognition  to  the  historical  realization  of  the  religious  ideas  in  the 
person  of  Christ.  Ritsciie  sought  to  eliminate  from  the  Christological 
question  all  metaphysical  consideration.  He  stated  that  knowledge 
was  not  the  principal  thing,  but  the  will.  Ethical  considerations  were 
of  prime  importance.  He  endeavored  furthermore  to  forestall  any 
collision  with  the  natural  sciences  and  the  higher  criticism.  He  there- 
fore attacked  the  doctrine  of  the  pre-existence  of  Christ,  while  avoiding 
all  dogmatic  considerations  of  the  person  of  Christ.  The  work  of 
Christ  was  of  prime  importance,  considered  from  the  ethical  stand- 
point. It  is  evident  that  Ritschl  denies  the  teachings  of  Christianity 
concerning  Christ.  The  more  recent  confessional  Dogmaticians  combat 
Ritschlianism  with  all  their  power.  The  confessional  Dogmaticians 
agree  with  the  old  Lutheran  orthodoxy  and  lay  all  stress  on  the  di- 
vinity as  well  as  the  humanity  of  Christ,  although  all  are  not  agreed 
on  the  question  of  kenosis.  Some  of  the  most  recent  theologians  set 
forth  that  Christ  could  have  come  into  the  world  independent  of  sin. 
The  Scandinavian  Dogmaticians  Martensen  and  Granfelt  hold  such 
views. 


§17.     UNIO  PERSONALIS  AND  ITS  IMMEDIATE 
RESULTS. 

The  result  of  the  incarnation  or  imitio  was  the  intimate 
union  of  the  divine  and  the  human  nature,  considered  as  a 
conditio,  which  union  is  called  unio  personalis  seu  hypo- 
statica.  But  this  personal  union  must  imply  the  communion 
of  the  natures  or  their  real  communion  and  communication. 
This  communion  of  the  natures  is  generally  expressed  in 
what  are  termed  Personal  Propositions. 

Dogmatics.     8. 


210  riiiusToi.ofjY. 

1.    The  Personal  Union. 

HOLLAZius  defines  the  personal  union  as  follows:*  "Unio 
PERSONALIS  is  the  union  of  the  tivo  natures,  the  divine  and 
the  human,  subsisting  in  the  one  hypostasis  of  the  Son  of 
God,  implying  a  mutual,  indissoluble  communion  of  the 
two  natures."  Christ  is  therefore  a  personal  (TvvOtTO'i.  The 
hypostasis  is  called  complex,  because  it  is  a  hypostasis  of 
two  natures,  while  before  the  unitio  it  was  an  hypostasis 
of  the  divine  nature  only.  Therefore  the  two  natures  are 
inseparable.  Gerhard*'-'  says  in  this  connection  that  nei- 
ther has  a  part  been  united  to  a  part,  but  the  entire  Logos 
to  the  entire  flesh  and  the  entire  flesh  to  the  entire  Logos; 
wherefore  it  follows  that  because  of  the  identity  of  the  per- 
son and  the  pervasion  of  the  natures  by  each  other,  the 
Logos  is  so  present  to  the  flesh  and  the  flesh  is  so  present 
to  the  Logos,  that  neither  the  Logos  is  without  the  flesh, 
nor  the  flesh  without  the  Logos,  but  wherever  the  Logos  is, 
there  is  the  flesh,  and  wherever  the  flesh  is,  there  is  the 
Logos.  The  following  negative  and  positive  terms  are  em- 
ployed to  define  more  closely  the  personal  union:  1)  nega- 
tiva: a)  non  verbalis,  inasmuch  as  the  God-man  is  not  a 
title;  h)non  notionalis  seu  rationis,  i.  e.,  it  is  not  a  concep- 
tual union;  c)  no7i  habitualis  seu  respectiva,  such  as  a  union 
between  husband  and  wife  or  between  friends;  d)  non  acci- 
dentalis,  inasmuch  as  it  is  not  a  union  such  as  that  of  sub- 
stance and  quality  in  a  learned  man  or  whiteness  and  sweet- 
ness in  milk  or  like  two  beams  joined  together;  e)  no7i 
essentialis,  so  that  the  two  natures  become  one,  which  term 
was  used  against  the  Eutychians;  f)  non  naturalis,  like  the 
soul  in  the  body.  It  is  not  that  sort  of  a  natural  union. 
2)  Positiva:  a)  realis,  or  real;  b)  personalis,  or  personal, 
but  not  a  union  of  two  persons;  c)  perichorintica,  inasmuch 
as  the  divine  nature  of  the  Logos  entirely  penetrates  the 

*  HoLLAZii'.s:  "Unio  personalis  est  duarum  naturarum,  divinse  et 
humana;,  in  una  filii  Dei  liypostasi  subsistentium,  conjunctio,  mutuam 
eamque  indissolubilem  utriusque  natura)  coniniunionem  inferens  " 

**  Gerhard  Loci  Theol.  Tomus  I,  Loc.  4,  pp.  501,  502,  or  3,  427,  428. 


UNIO   PERSONALIS    AXD   ITS    UIMEDIATE   RESULTS.  211 

human  nature  and  imparts  itself  in  the  totality  and  perfec- 
tion of  its  essence;  d)  perpetuo  duvans,  because  it  is  an 
eternal  union. 

2.  The  Communion  of  the  Natures. 
COMMUNIO  NATURARUM  is  a  necessary  consequence  of  the 
unio  personalis.  Hollazius  defines  as  follows:*  "Communio 
NATURARUM  is  the  mutual  participation  of  the  divme  and 
human  natures  of  Christ,  through  which  the  divine  nature 
of  the  Logos,  having  been  made  partaker  of  the  human  na- 
ture, permeates,  perfects,  inhabits  and  appropriates  it  unto 
Himself,  while  the  human  nature,  having  been  made  par- 
taker of  the  divine  nature,  is  permeated,  perfected  and  in- 
habited by  it."  The  divine  nature  is  therefore  active  in  this 
permeation  which  is  more  clearly  defined  by  the  old  Dogma- 
ticians,  such  as  Hollazius,  in  the  following  terms:  1)  in- 
tima et  perfectissima,  by  which  is  meant  that  the  union  or 
the  communion  is  not  an  external  one,  such  as  when  angels 
have  been  revealed  in  human  form,  or  like  the  clothes  on 
a  body;  2)  mutua  in  the  sense  that  the  divine  nature  in 
actual  essence  or  in  the  most  absolute  act  (eVreA/xeta)  per- 
meates and  perfects  the  assumed  human  nature,  which  is 
permeated  and  perfected.  This  is  therefore  a  7rep(xwp7;crts, 
which,  however,  is  neither  local  nor  quantitative,  but  per- 
meates indivisibly  and  simultaneously  every  part  of  the 
human  nature.  In  this  connection  we  may  quote  Col.  2:9: 
"In  him  dwelleth  all  the  fulness  of  the  Godhead  bodily." 
The  old  Dogmaticians  made  use  of  various  analogies,  such 
as  permeatio  in  the  Trinity,  the  permeation  and  the  in- 
dwelling of  the  soul  in  the -body  and  the  permeation  of  the 
iron  by  the  fire;  3)  inseparabilis,  i.  e.,  after  the  incarnation 
the  divine  nature  was  never  separated  from  the  human 
nature,  not  even  when  the  soul  was  separated  from  the 
body  in  the  grave.    The  divine  nature  of  the  Logos  was  in 

*  Hollazius:  "Communio  naturarum  est  mutua  divinse  et  humanse 
Christi  natura'  participatio,  per  quam  natura  divina  rov  Aoyov,  par- 
ticeps  facta  liumana?  naturae,  hanc  permeat,  perficit,  inliabitat,  sibique 
appropriat;  humana  vero,  particeps  facta  divinae  naturae  ab  hac  per- 
meatur,  perficitur  et  inhabitur." 


212  CIIKISTOLOGY. 

the  highest  degree  present  in  the  assumed  human  nature; 
4)  sine  confusione,  mixtione  et  tranHmutatioiic  ( ao-vyxuro?, 
a/AtJcros  Kat  ärpeTTTos) ,  i.  e.,  without  confusion,  mixture  or 
change,  as  the  soul  is  not  commingled  or  changed  in  the 
body;  5)  dStao-raTov,  or  that  both  natures  are  so  intimately 
united  in  a  permanent  sense  and  so  present  in  and  through 
each  other  that  the  one  nature  is  never  outside  of  nor  apart 
from  the  other.  We  find  analogies  in  the  Trinity,  and  in 
more  comprehensible  form  in  the  normal  relationship  be- 
tween the  soul  and  the  body. 

The  third  term,  inseparahilU,  means  that  the  two  natures 
could  never  be  separated,  not  even  at  the  death  and  burial 
of  Christ.  When  Christ  died  His  soul  was  separated  from 
the  body  just  as  every  person  experiences  death.  The  body 
of  Christ  was  placed  in  the  tomb  and  His  spirit-soul  was 
transferred  to  Paradise,  where  the  spirit  of  Christ  remained 
until  vivification  on  the  resurrection  morning.  The  dead 
body  of  Christ  was  not  exposed  to  decomposition,  as  He  was 
sinless  and  had  completed  the  reconciliation  in  its  two  ob- 
jective parts,  namely,  satisfaction  and  expiation  or  atone- 
ment. His  state  of  exinanition  ended  with  His  burial.  Cf. 
Acts  2:  31;  13:  35,  37.  The  brief  separation  of  His  soul 
and  body  made  no  break  in  the  continued  personal  union  of 
the  two  natures.  The  unsevered  union  of  body  and  soul 
with  the  divine  nature  or  Logos  was  necessary  for  the 
verity  of  the  uninterrupted  personal  union  and  communion 
of  natures.  The  personality  of  the  God-man  depends  ac- 
tively upon  the  divine  nature,  as  the  Son  of  God  or  Logos 
was  personal  or  a  person  before  He  assumed  the  human 
nature.  A  human  soul  is  the  active  factor  in  the  personality 
of  man.  In  Paradise  the  divine  nature  or  Logos  was  united 
with  the  soul  of  Christ  and  also  with  the  body.  This  be- 
comes clearer,  when  we  consider  that  the  divine  omni- 
presence is  intensive  and  not  extensive.  Besides  we  should 
remember  the  communication  of  attributes  according  to 
genus  majestaticum  which  concerns  the  entire  nature  and 
not  a  part  of  it  as  the  soul.  The  old  theologians  spoke  of 
prsesentia  intima  and  praesentia  extima,  the  former  term 


UNIO   PERSONALIS    AXD   ITS    IMMEDIATE    RESULTS.  213 

meaning  the  presence  of  the  natures  to  one  another  and  the 
second  term  denoting  the  presence  to  created  things.  Even 
in  the  state  of  exinanition,  when  prsesentia  extima  was  an 
extraordinary  exception,  the  prsesentia  intima,  which  is  in- 
dependent of  space  and  time,  could  not  cease  on  account  of 
the  personal  union. 

The  fifth  term  under  our  heading,  communio  naturarnm, 
is  connected  with  the  preceding.  One  nature  cannot  be 
without  or  outside  of  the  other.  The  divine  nature  cannot 
be  locally  encircling  in  space  and  the  human  nature  circum- 
scribed in  a  place  as  in  heaven.  Where  the  God-man  is,  He 
is  entire.  There  are  two  modes  of  presence,  depending 
upon  the  natures.  The  God-man  has  one  definite  presence 
on  account  of  the  human  nature  and  one  omnipresent  mode 
according  to  the  divine  nature.  But  in  both  modes  He  is 
entire  and  undivided.  According  to  the  mode  of  His  mani- 
festation in  heaven,  He  is  entire,  and  according  to  His 
presence  with  us  here  on  earth  as  He  has  promised.  He  is 
entire  in  both  natures  by  a  divine  mode.  This  presence  of 
Christ  in  both  natures  as  one  person  is  explained  by  the 
action  of  the  divine  nature  upon  the  human  in  the  com- 
munication of  attributes.     Cf.  genus  majestaticum. 

3.    The  Personal  Propositions. 

PROPOSITIONES  PERSONALES.  —  hi  these  propositions  or 
designations  the  co7icrete  expressed  concerning  one  nature 
is  the  predicate  of  the  concrete  of  the  other  nature,  and.  still 
in  a  luay  that  is  peculiar  and  unusual,  in  order  to  express 
the  unio7i  of  the  two  natures  and  their  communion  in  the 
one  person. 

It  is  important  to  note  that  the  question  concerns  the 
concrete  of  the  natures ;  the  concrete  of  the  divine  nature 
when  the  designation  is  derived  from  the  divine  nature,  and 
the  concrete  of  the  human  nature  when  the  designation  is 
derived  from  the  human  nature.  The  question  cannot  con- 
cern the  concrete  of  the  person,  the  concrete  being  the 
designation  of  the  person  that  consists  of  the  two  natures. 
The  abstract  designation  of  the  natures  is  also  excluded. 


214  CHKISTOLOGY. 

inasmuch  as  we  cannot  say  that  divinitas  est  humanitas. 
Concrete  designations  for  the  divine  nature  are  such  as 
(;od,  and  the  Son  of  God.  The  designations  of  the  human 
nature  are  such  as  man,  the  Son  of  man,  and  Son  of  Mary. 
The  concrete  of  the  person  is  expressed  in  such  designations 
as  Messiah,  Immanuel,  and  Christ.  According  to  proposi- 
tiones  personales  with  reference  to  the  concrete  names  of 
the  natures  we  can  therefore  say,  God  is  man,  Jesus  is  God, 
etc.  These  personal  propositions  are  true  because  of  the 
personal  union.  The  following  Bible  passages  may  be 
quoted :  "Unto  us  a  child  is  born,  unto  us  a  son  is  given,  and 
his  name  shall  be  called  Mighty  God"  (Isa.  9:6);  "Who 
do  men  say  that  the  Son  of  man  is  ?  Simon  Peter  answered 
and  said.  Thou  art  the  Christ,  the  Son  of  the  living  God" 
(Matt.  16:  13—16);  "The  holy  thing  which  is  begotten 
shall  be  called  the  Son  of  God"  (Luke  1:  35)  ;  "The  second 
man  is  of  heaven"  (1  Cor.  15:  47)  ;  "The  Son  of  God  is 
come;  we  are  in  him  that  is  true,  even  in  his  Son  Jesus 
Christ.  This  is  the  true  God,  and  eternal  life"  (1  John 
5:  20). 

The  personal  propositions  are  further  defined  by  the  fol- 
lowing terms:  1)  negative:  a)  non  mere  verbales.  The 
propositions  are  not  to  be  understood  as  if  only  the  name, 
but  not  the  nature  thereby  designated,  were  predicated  of 
the  subject,  as  Nestorius  does,  when  he  says  that  the  Son 
of  Mary  was  the  Son  of  God,  ascribing  to  the  subject  merely 
a  title,  but  positively  refusing  to  acknowledge  that  He  who 
was  the  Son  of  Mary  was  also  true  Son  of  God;  b)  neque 
improprue  ant  tropica,  such  as  a  painting  or  a  statue,  which 
may  represent  a  person,  so  that  we  may  say,  this  is  such 
and  such  a  person.  Christ  was  not  the  Son  of  God  in  only 
an  ideal  sense  or  in  any  unreal  or  figurative  sense;  c)  neque 
identic^,  i.  e.,  the  predicates  that  are  ascribed  to  the  subject 
art  not  to  be  so  explained  as  if  they  applied  to  it  only  in 
so  far  as  the  predicate  precisely  corresponds  to  that  nature 
from  which  the  designation  of  the  subject  is  derived.  For 
example,  the  proposition.  The  Son  of  (Jod  is  the  Son  of 
Mary,  cannot  be  interpreted  as  follows,  The  man  who  is 


ÖOMMITNICATrO    11)10  JIATUM.  215 

united  with  the  Son  of  God  is  the  son  of  Mary ;  consequently 
the  concrete  of  the  predicate  ascribed  to  the  concrete  of  the 
subject  should  not  be  of  the  identical  nature;  we  should  not 
say:  Jesus  is  the  son  of  Mary;  d)  neqiie  essentiales,  as  if 
the  subject,  in  its  essential  nature,  were  that  which  the 
predicate  ascribes  to  it.  God  is  man,  would  then  mean, 
The  nature  of  God  is  this,  that  it  is  the  nature  of  man ; 
2)  positive:  a)  reales,  or  in  the  real  sense;  b)  imisitatée,  or 
unusual;  c)  si7ie  exemplo,  or  without  any  analogical  or  real 
examples.  In  accordance  with  these  propositions  therefore 
Nestorianism,  Eutychianism  and  Adoptionism  together 
with  other  related  theories  are  rejected. 

§18.     COMMUNICATIO  IDIOMATUM. 

As  a  necessary  result  of  unio  personalis  and  communio 
naturarum  the  doctrine  of  communicatio  idiomatum  and 
communis  operatio  occupies  a  central  and  important  place 
in  the  Lutheran  Christology.  The  communication  of  the 
attributes  is  defined  by  Hollazius  as  follows:*  ''Commu- 
nicatio IDIOMATUM  is  the  true  and  real  participation  of  the 
properties  of  the  divine  and  human  natures,  restating  from 
the  personal  unioyi  in  Christ,  the  God-man,  designated  by 
either  nature  or  by  both  naturen." 

By  idiomata  we  understand  the  properties  and  the  dis- 
tinguishing characteristics  of  the  natures,  through  which 
the  two  natures  are  distinguished,  and  by  which  they  are 
known.  Gerhard  points  out  that  the  divine  properties  be- 
long to  the  essence  of  the  Logos,  while  the  human  proper- 
ties do  not  belong  to  the  essence  of  the  human  nature,  but 
are  derived  from  it.  There  is  a  communication  of  the 
idiomata  between  the  natures  and  the  person  and  also  be- 
tween the  natures  reciprocally. 

Dogmaticians  use  the  following  terms  more  clearly  to 
define  communicatio  idiomatum:  1)   jiegative:  a)   non  ver- 

*  Hollazius:  "Communicatio  idiomatum  est  vera  et  realis  propriorum 
divinae  et  humanse  naturae  in  Christo  OeavOpionto^  ab  alterutra  vel 
utraque  natura  denominato,  participatio  ex  unione  personali  resultans." 


216  CIIRISTOLOGY. 

balls  et  titidaris.  This  term  is  used  against  the  Calvinists 
or  the  Reformed  in  general,  who  say  that  the  communicatio 
idiomatum  is  real  in  regard  to  the  person,  designated  either 
in  accordance  with  the  divine  or  human  nature,  but  that  in 
regard  to  the  natures  themselves  communicatio  is  simply- 
verbal,  so  that  it  is  a  communicatio  verborum  and  not 
idiomatum;  b)  iion  intellectualis,  because  it  is  not  a  bare 
concept  without  concrete  content;  c)  )ion  exiBquativa,  inas- 
much as  the  distinction  of  the  natures  remains;  d)  mm 
viidtiplicativa,  so  as  to  imply  a  multiplication  and  therefore 
different  subjects;  e)  nan  t)-a7isfusica,  since  the  divine  na- 
ture does  not  pour  out  over  or  impart  to  the  human  nature 
something  which  it  would  not  afterwards  possess;  f)  no7i 
accidentalis,  or  accidental;  g)  non  commixtiva,  not  through 
commingling;  h)  71011  esHeyitialis,  inasmuch  as  the  proper- 
ties of  the  one  nature  cannot  become  the  essential  pos- 
session of  the  other  nature;  2)  positive:  a)  i-ealis,  or  a 
real  communication;  b)  personalis,  i.  e.,  a  communication 
KttTtt  crvvhvauLv  ov  such  a  communiou  of  the  natures,  through 
which  the  two  natures  are  so  intimately  united  with  each 
other,  that,  their  essence  remaining  distinct,  the  one  nature 
without  mixture  really  receives  and  participates  in  the  pe- 
culiar power,  work  and  property  of  the  other  on  the  ground 
of  the  communion  of  the  natures  in  the  one  person;  c) 
supe7'natnralis,  because  it  takes  place  in  a  supernatural  way. 
Communicatio  idiomatum  is  divided  into  three  classes : 
genus  idiomaticum,  genus  majestaticum  and  genus  apoteles- 
maticum.     Some  would  also  add  rairuvoTLKov  or  kw>tlk6v, 

I.    Genus  Idiomaticum. 

Genus  idiomaticum  is  that  genus  hij  ichich  the  attiibutes 
that  are  peciiliai-  or'  belong  to  the  divine  oi'  to  the  human 
nature  are  truly  ayid  really  asci'ibed  to  the  entire  person  of 
Christ,  designated  by  either  one  of  the  natures  or  both. 

(ienus  idiomaticum  is  divided  into  three  species:  1) 
l6ioiTo[rjaL^  or  appropriatio  is  the  species  in  accordance  with 
which  human  idiomata  are  predicated  concerning  Christ, 
designated  by  the  concrete  of  the  divine  nature.     The  fol- 


I 


COMMUNICATIO    IDIOMATUJr.  217 

lowing  may  serve  as  examples :  "Crucified  the  Lord  of 
glory"  (1  Cor.  2:8);  "The  Son  of  God  gave  himself  up 
for  me"  (Gal.  2:  20)  ;  2)  kolvwvlu  twv  Oumv  {participation  of 
the  divine)  is  that  species  by  which  divine  idiomata  are 
predicated  concerning  Christ,  designated  by  the  concrete 
names  of  the  human  nature.  "The  Son  of  man  ascending 
where  he  was  before"  (John  6:  62)  ;  "Before  Abraham  was 
born,  I  am"  (John  8:  58)  ;  3)  dirtSoo-ts,  alteniatio  or  recipro- 
catio  is  that  genus  by  which  both  the  divine  and  the  human 
idiomata  are  predicated  concerning  the  concrete  of  the  per- 
son, designated  from  both  natures.  The  following  may 
serve  as  examples :  "Christ  as  concerning  the  flesh,  who  is 
over  all,  God  blessed  for  ever"  (Rom.  9:  5)  ;  "Jesus  Christ 
is  the  same  yesterday  and  to-day,  yea  and  for  ever"  (Heb. 
13:  8)  ;  "Christ  also  suffered  for  sins  once,  the  righteous 
for  the  unrighteous;  being  put  to  death  in  the  flesh"  (1 
Peter  3:  18). 

It  follows  from  this  that  the  subject  in  genus  idiomaticum 
may  be  either  the  concrete  of  the  natures  or  the  concrete 
name  of  the  person,  but  neither  the  one  nor  the  other  nature 
in  the  abstract  sense.  We  can  say  that  God  is  dead  or  that 
the  Son  of  God  is  dead.  A^'e  can  also  say  that  Jesus  is  dead 
or  that  Christ  is  dead,  but  we  cannot  say  that  the  divine 
nature  is  dead.  In  order  to  show  which  nature  is  imme- 
diately concerned  in  the  predicate,  although  both  natures 
are  included  by  reason  of  unio  personalis,  the  following 
particulse  discriticse  are  used,  viz.,  iv,  it,  8i.d  and  Kard.  The 
use  of  these  particles  does  not,  however,  mean  that  it  is 
only  the  designated  nature  that  is  active.  In  the  third 
genus  on  that  account  there  is  presented  communicatio 
operationum,  by  which  the  concept  of  t8to7roi'7?o-i9  in  genus 
idiomaticum  is  made  complete. 

II.    Genus  Majestaticum. 
Genus  majestaticum  seu  auchematicum  is  that  genus 
bij  which  the  Church  declares  that  the  Son  of  God  really 
communicates  the  2^^'operties  of  the  divine  nature  to  the 
human  nature. 


218  CHRISTOI.OCiY. 

This  genus  is  like  unto  the  second  species  in  genus  idio- 
maticum  with  this  difference,  which  is  principally  formal, 
that  in  the  latter  the  real  subject  is  the  entire  person  of 
Christ,  while  in  genus  majestaticum  the  real  subject  (sub- 
jectum  cui)  is  the  assumed  human  nature. 

The  subject  (subjectum  cui)  therefore  is  really  the  con- 
crete of  the  human  nature,  but  the  concrete  names  of  the 
person  may  also  be  used  and  sometimes  also  the  abstract 
designations  of  the  human  nature.  The  following  examples 
may  be  quoted:  "There  was  given  him  (Son  of  man)  do- 
minion, and  glory,  and  a  kingdom"  (Daniel  7:  14)  ;  "And 
he  gave  him  authority  to  execute  judgment,  because  he  is 
the  Son  of  man"  (John  5:  27)  ;  "The  Son  of  man  hath 
authority  on  earth  to  forgive  sins"  (Matt.  9;  6);  "And 
Jesus  came  to  them  and  spake  to  them,  saying.  All  authority 
hath  been  given  unto  me  in  heaven  and  on  earth"  (Matt. 
28:  18)  ;  "Where  two  or  three  are  gathered  together  in  my 
name,  there  am  I  in  the  midst  of  them"  (Matt.  18:  20)  ; 
"Christ,  in  whom  are  all  the  treasures  of  wisdom  and  knowl- 
edge hidden"  (Col.  2:3);  "My  flesh  is  meat  indeed"  (John 
6:  55). 

These  Scripture  passages  prove  clearly  that  genus  maje- 
staticum possess  a  Biblical  foundation.  And  still  the  Re- 
formed Church  rejects  this  genus,  saying  that  all  expres- 
sions in  this  direction  are  figurative.  When  anything  is 
ascribed  to  the  divine  nature  of  Christ  which  is  a  property 
of  the  human  nature,  as  well  as  the  reverse,  this  Zwingli 
calls  alloeosis.  Luther  condemned  the  Zwinglian  doctrine 
of  alloeosis  in  the  strongest  terms.  The  opponents  of  this 
genus  argue  that  the  divine  idiomata  can  not  be  imparted 
to  the  human  nature  except  as  the  divine  essence  is  also 
imparted,  because  the  properties  cannot  be  separated  from 
the  nature  of  God.  However,  the  properties  referred  to, 
while  founded  in  the  divine  essence,  must  nevertheless  be 
considered  as  attributes  ad  extra.  For  this  reason  they  can 
be  imparted,  although  not  in  such  manner  as  to  become  the 
essential  possession  of  the  human  nature.  Another  objec- 
tion has  been  made  to  this  genus  which  asserts  that  it  is 


CÖMMUNICATIO   IDIOMATUM.  219 

one-sided  and  that  consistency  demands  a  reciprocity  to  be 
expressed  by  a  genus  TUTreivoTLKov  or  KevoriKov .  In  answer  it 
may  be  said  that  only  the  divine  nature  is  active.  A  genus 
raireLvoTLKov  would  militate  against  the  unchangeableness  of 
God,  not  to  speak  of  the  reflex  action  which  such  a  genus 
would  exercise  on  the  doctrine  of  the  human  nature  and  in 
consequence  also  in  relation  to  the  validity  of  the  atone- 
ment. 

In  the  discussion  of  the  doctrine  of  genus  majestaticum 
we  must  not  confuse  the  imparted  idiomata  of  the  divine 
nature  with  the  special  prerogatives  of  the  human  nature. 
These  prerogatives  surpass  the  most  excellent  gifts  of  men 
and  angels,  and  still  they  are  created  gifts,  while,  on  the 
other  hand,  the  divine  majesty  which  is  imparted  is  infinite 
and  not  to  be  counted  among  finite  attributes. 

1.      CONCERNING    MODUS    COMMUNICANDI. 

Concerning  the  manner  of  communication  the  Dogmati- 
cians  use  the  following  terms:  1)  Negative:  a)  7ion  per 
geminationem  or  through  duplication,  so  that  the  divine 
nature  should  possess  properties  and  in  addition  to  this 
that  the  human  nature  should  come  into  possession  of  the 
same  or  similar  properties;  b)  noyi  transiens,  so  that  the 
one  nature  would  pass  over  into  the  other;  c)  non  trans- 
fusiens,  so  that  the  divine  properties  would  be  poured  out 
over  the  human  nature  in  such  manner  as  to  become  the 
real  possession  of  this  nature;  d)  7ion  adsequativus,  or  that 
the  nature  became  alike;  e)  7ion  destructivus,  so  that  the 
human  nature  would  be  destroyed  and  only  the  divine  na- 
ture remain  thereafter.  2)  Positive:  a)  entelechialis  et 
perichoristicus,  i.  e.,  in  an  active  permeating  way;  b)  ad 
possessio7iem  (with  reference  to  possession)  in  regard  to 
all  the  attributes,  and  c)  ad  usurpationem  (with  reference 
to  use)  in  regard  to  the  relative  attributes. 

2.      DIVISION  AND  COMMUNICATION  OF  THE  ATTRIBUTES. 

As  we  recall,  the  Dogmaticians  divide  the  divine  attri- 
butes in  many  ways.  We  here  use  the  division  into  im- 
manent and  relative  attributes. 


220  CIIUISTOI.OGY. 

1)  ' Avtvépyr]Ta  or  the  immanent  are  such  attributes  as  eter- 
nity and  infinity.  Tliese  are  imparted  to  the  human  nature 
of  Christ  mediatehj  through  the  relative  or  operative  attri- 
butes as  to  denomination  (ad  denominationem) ,  as  to  in- 
dwelling (ad  inhabitationem)  and  as  to  pofisesnion  (ad  pos- 
sessionem), but  not  o.s  to  use  (ad  usurpationem) ,  or,  briefly 
stated,  as  to  kt^<ti<;  or  possession,  but  not  as  to  XPW'-'^  or  use, 
which  depends  on  the  nature  of  the  attributes.  It  is  self- 
evident  that  the  human  nature  could  not  become  eternal,  as 
it  had  a  beginning  from  the  time  of  conception,  v^herefore 
this  attribute  was  imparted  for  possession  only. 

2)  ^EvtpyyjTiKa  QY  the  volative  and  operative  attributes,  such 
as  power,  omniscience,  omnipresence,  etc.,  were  immedi- 
ately imparted  as  to  name,  indwelling,  possession  and  use 
or  both  as  to  Kriym?  and  XRW'-'^-  It  was  because  of  His  hu- 
miliation that  the  Lord  used  them  only  partly.  All  the  attri- 
butes, both  the  immanent  and  the  relative,  were  imparted 
to  the  human  nature  of  Christ  at  the  incarnation. 

As  examples  we  would  especially  present  the  divine 
power,  omniscience,  and  particularly  omnipresence,  although 
others,  such  as  the  active  principle  of  life,  could  be  re- 
ferred to. 

a)  Omnipotence. — According  to  this  genus  omnipotence 
is  imparted  to  the  human  nature  of  Christ  both  as  to  pos- 
session and  use.  The  Reformed  teach  that  only  the  divine 
nature  is  omnipotent.  Christ  used  almighty  power  in  per- 
forming miracles.  We  have  already  quoted  Daniel  7:  13 
and  Matt.  28 :  18.  We  would  add :  "Even  as  thou  gavest 
him  authority  over  all  flesh"  (John  17:  2);  "When  the 
multitude  saw  it,  they  were  afraid,  and  glorified  God,  who 
had  given  such  authority  unto  men"  (Matt.  9:  8);  "All 
things  have  been  delivered  unto  me  of  my  Father"  (Matt. 
11:  27). 

b)  Omniscience. — The  human  nature  of  Christ  also  be- 
came endowed  with  omniscience  through  the  divine  nature. 
The  following  passages  may  be  quoted:  "Now  know  we  that 
thou  knowest  all  things,  and  needest  not  that  any  man 
should  ask  thee:  by  this  we  believe  that  thou  camest  forth 


COaiMUNICATIO   IDIOMATUM.  221 

from  God"  (John  16:  30)  ;  "But  Jesus  did  not  trust  himself 
unto  them,  for  tliat  he  knew  all  men"  (John  2:  24)  ;  "When 
thou  wast  under  the  fig  tree,  I  saw  thee"  (John  1 :  48)  ;  "In 
whom  are  all  the  treasures  of  wisdom  and  knowledge  hid- 
den" (Col.  2:3).  Mark  11:  32  as  well  as  Luke  2:  52  are 
to  be  explained  by  the  doctrine  of  humiliation. 

c)  Oynnipresence. — Christ  received  this  attribute  as  well 
as  the  others  at  His  incarnation.  A  limitation  of  its  use 
naturally  took  place  through  the  voluntary  humiliation  of 
Christ.  The  following  passages  throw  light  on  the  omni- 
presence of  Christ:  "Where  two  or  three  are  gathered  to- 
gether in  my  name,  there  am  I  in  the  midst  of  them"  (Matt. 
18:  20)  ;  "And  lo,  I  am  with  you  always,  even  unto  the  end 
of  the  world"  (Matt.  28:  20)  ;  "The  Son  of  man,  who  is  in 
heaven"  (John  3:  13)  ;  "The  fulness  of  him  that  filleth  all 
in  all"  (Eph.  1 :  23)  ;  "He  that  is  the  same  also  that  ascended 
far  above  all  the  heavens,  that  he  might  fill  all  things" 
(Eph.  4:  10).  In  case  the  reading,  "The  Son  of  man,  who 
is  in  heaven"  (John  3:  13)  is  correct,  then  Christ  even 
during  the  period  of  His  humiliation  was  in  a  certain  sense 
in  heaven,  but  this  expression  is  lacking  in  certain  manu- 
scripts. Still  the  same  question  is  made  clear  especially  in 
the  light  of  unio  personalis  and  communio  naturarum. 
However,  His  human  nature  remained  in  possession  of  its 
own  natural  attributes,  for  which  reason  during  His  earthly 
existence  He  was  present  somewhere  circumscriptive,  and 
between  His  resurrection  and  ascension  He  was  present 
somewhere  definitive.  His  presence  during  the  latter  pe- 
riod, although  real,  was  nevertheless  different  from  His 
presence  before  His  death,  as  may  be  gathered  from  the 
words:  "While  I  was  yet  with  you"  (Luke  24:  44).  Be- 
tween His  resurrection  and  ascension  Christ  was  in  one 
sense  definitive  present  on  the  earth,  but  in  another  sense 
He  was  really  present  everywhere  and  therefore  also  in 
heaven.  After  the  ascension  in  accordance  with  His  human 
nature  and  on  the  basis  of  unio  personalis  in  one  sense  or 
in  a  certain  mode  Christ  is  present  definitive  as  to  His 
whole  person  in  heaven,  but  in  another  and  just  as  real 


222  CIIRISTOLOGY. 

sense  He  is  present  repletive  everywhere  as  to  His  whole 
person  and  therefore  also  according  to  His  human  nature 
through  the  divine  nature.  He  is  omnipresent  as  God  is 
intensively  and  illocally  omnipresent,  God  is  not  omni- 
present in  an  extensive  sense.  As  an  absolute  person  His 
essence  is  such  that  He  is  omnipresent  in  an  intensive  and 
repletive  sense,  otherwise  God  would  become  a  world-soul 
or  the  All.  But  as  we  must  reject  Pantheism  and  believe 
in  a  personal'  God,  therefore  we  must  conceive  of  His  omni- 
presence in  the  light  of  the  concept  of  His  absolute  per- 
sonality. What  is  applicable  to  the  one  person  in  the  God- 
head, is  likewise  applicable  to  the  other.  By  reason  of  the 
incarnation  and  on  the  ground  of  unio  personalis  we  cannot 
exclude  the  human  nature  of  Christ,  Luther  correctly  em- 
phasized the  fact  that  wherever  Christ  is,  there  He  is 
entire.  His  divine  nature  must  be  where  His  human  nature 
is,  and  His  human  nature  must  be  where  His  divine  nature 
is,  because  this  is  a  necessary  consequence  of  the  union  of 
both  natures  in  one  person.  The  old  Dogmaticians  had 
different  conceptions  of  the  omnipresence  of  Christ.  We 
will  again  present  the  three  different  terms  and  explana- 
tions: 1)  omnipr essentia  modificata,  by  which  those  that 
held  that  view  understood,  with  reference  to  praesentia 
extima,  a  powerful  dominion  or  an  operative  omnipresence 
in  the  affairs  of  the  world.  In  this  connection  they  did  not 
take  into  consideration  nuda  adessentia,  or  else  they  ignored 
it;  2)  onuiiprxsentia  relativa  sen  respectiva,  by  which  is 
meant  that  Christ  as  to  His  human  nature  with  reference 
to  praesentia  extima  was  present  wherever  He  willed  to  be 
(multivoliprassens),  or  wherever  He  had  promised  to  be,  as 
in  the  Church  or  the  Lord's  Supper;  3)  omnipraesentia 
absoluta,  by  which  is  meant  a  real  omnipresence  in  a  sub- 
stantial and  operative  sense.  This  view  is  really  the  only 
one  that  logically  agrees  with  the  doctrine  of  unio  perso- 
nalis. The  divine  nature  must  necessarily  possess  omni- 
prsesentia  absoluta,  whence  it  follows  that  the  human  nature 
through  the  divine  nature  must  likewise  be  omnipresent  in 
a  substantial  and  operative  sense.    The  human  nature,  how- 


COMMUNICATIO   IDIOMATUM.  223 

ever,  has  not  lost  its  own  attributes  or  properties  and  must 
for  this  reason  be  definitive  present  in  heaven.  In  this 
sense,  so  far  as  we  know,  Christ  has  not  been  present  on 
the  earth  since  the  ascension  and  shall  not  be  so  present 
until  the  last  day.  But,  as  stated,  this  does  not  prevent 
Him  in  another  mode  and  as  to  His  whole  person,  and  there- 
fore also  as  to  His  manhood,  from  being  present  on  the 
earth  as  well  as  in  heaven,  yea,  everywhere.  And  this 
presence  is  just  as  true  and  real  as  the  other.  The  divine 
is  not  outside  of  the  human,  as  the  Reformed  teach.  They 
limit  the  human  nature  in  a  local  way  to  heaven.  But  in 
this  manner  Christ  is  divided  and  the  personal  union  is  not 
true.  Christ  is  present  in  a  definite  and  repletive  manner. 
The  natures  are  not  made  into  one  substance  through  mix- 
ture, nor  is  the  one  nature  changed  into  the  other,  but  each 
nature  retains  its  own  essential  attributes  or  properties,  so 
that  they  cannot  become  the  attributes  of  the  other.  For 
this  reason  Christ  must  have  a  definitive  presence  as  well 
as  a  divine  omnipresence.  This  will  be  more  easily  under- 
stood when  we  remember  that  this  is  not  a  local  extensive 
omnipresence,  but  as  the  personal  God  is  omnipresent. 

We  should  always  keep  in  mind  the  statement  of  Luther 
that,  where  Christ  is,  there  He  is  entire.  But  there  are 
two  modes,  because  there  are  two  natures  and  yet  the  pres- 
ence according  to  each  mode  is  real.  The  Lutheran  Church 
holds  that  the  attributes  of  one  nature  of  Christ  do  not 
become  essentially  the  attributes  of  the  other,  but  on  ac- 
count of  genus  majestaticum  in  accordance  with  the  Word 
of  God  the  divine  nature  communicates  to  the  human  nature 
the  possession  and  use  of  omnipresence.  But  this  does  not 
mean  a  local  ubiquity  or  expansion  of  the  human  nature. 
It  is  a  presence  of  the  human  nature  with  the  divine,  being 
one  person,  according  to  the  divine  mode.  Even  matter 
may  have  different  modes,  for  instance,  water  may  be 
turned  into  ice  or  steam,  but  it  is  the  same  water.  A  human 
body  may  change  and  be  the  same.  In  the  resurrection  the 
human  body  will  exist  in  a  difi'erent  mode,  but  the  identity 
is  not  lost.     Paul   speaks   of  the   resurrection   body   as  a 


224  (  IIUISTOI.OGY. 

"spiritual  body."  When  Christ  rose  from  the  dead  in  His 
spiritual  and  glorified  body,  He  entered  into  the  state  of 
exaltation  and  used  constantly  the  relative  attributes  im- 
parted by  the  divine  nature.  By  the  divine  power  the  hu- 
man nature  and,  therefore,  the  whole  person,  could  be  omni- 
present. He  is  omnipresent  in  such  a  mode  that  belongs 
to  the  divine  nature.  We  should  not  be  confused  by  the 
existence  and  form  of  an  ordinary  human  body  which  has 
had  many  modes  in  growing  or  developing  from  a  tiny  cell 
and  an  invisible  principle.  And  the  human  soul,  although 
penetrating  and  limited  to  the  human  body,  is  entire  in 
every  point  and  less  dependent  upon  space  than  the  body. 
We  do  not  need  to  refer  to  the  attributes  of  the  resurrection 
body.  The  omnipotence  of  God  solves  the  whole  problem. 
The  Triune  God,  who  in  creation  made  the  visibles  to  ap- 
pear from  the  invisibles,  is  also  able  to  cause  the  human 
nature  of  Christ  through  the  divine  to  be  omnipresent  in 
both  natures  or  as  the  God-man.  But  on  account  of  the 
attributes  of  the  human  nature  Christ  has  also  a  definite 
presence  in  heaven,  from  whence  He  returns  at  the  second 
Advent.     Both  presences  are  equally  real. 

For  this  reason  the  Formula  of  Concord  rejects  among 
others  the  following  doctrines:* 

"That  the  human  nature  of  Christ  has  become  equal  to, 
and  like  the  divine  nature,  in  its  substance  and  essence,  or 
in  its  essential  properties.  That  the  human  nature  of 
Christ  is  locally  extended  in  all  places  of  heaven  and  earth, 
which  would  not  be  ascribed  even  to  the  divine  nature. 
That  because  of  the  property  of  His  human  nature,  it  is 
impossible  for  Christ  to  be  able  to  be  at  the  same  time  in 
more  than  one  place,  much  less  to  be  everywhere  with  his 
body.  That  Christ  is  present  with  us  on  earth  in  the 
Word,  the  sacraments  and  all  our  troubles,  only  according 
to  His  divinity,  and  this  presence  does  not  at  all  pertain  to 
His  human  nature,  according  to  which  He  has  also  nothing 

*  The  Formula  of  Concord,  Nos.  9,  10.  11,  13,  14.  Miiller's  Sj-mb. 
Biicher,  p.  54S,  549.  The  Boolt  of  Concord,  Dr.  Jacobs'  English  edition, 
p.  520. 


COMMUNICATIO    IDIOJUATUM.  225 

more  whatever  to  do  with  us  even  upon  earth,  since  He 
redeemed  us  by  His  suffering  and  death.  That  the  Son  of 
God,  who  assumed  human  nature,  since  He  has  laid  aside 
the  form  of  a  servant  does  not  perform  all  the  works  of 
His  omnipotence  in,  through  and  with  His  human  nature, 
but  only  some,  and  those  too  only  in  the  place  where  His 
human  nature  is  locally." 

HI.     Genus  apotelesmaticum. 

Genus  apotelesmaticum,  or  communicatio  operationum, 
is  that  genus  by  ivhich,  in  official  acts,  each  nature  does 
that  ivhich  is  peculiay^  to  itself,  the  other  natui^e  pa7^tici- 
pating.  In  accordance  with  this  genus,  therefore,  every 
act  of  Christ  which  has  reference  to  redemption  is  referred 
not  only  to  the  one  nature  to  the  exclusion  of  the  other,  but 
to  the  entire  person  of  Christ  or  to  one  of  the  natures,  the 
other  participating.  The  subject,  therefore,  is  either  the 
concrete  of  the  person  or  the  concrete  of  the  divine  nature 
or  of  the  human  nature  and  sometimes  also  an  abstract 
name.  ' ATrortXea-fxa  meaus  a  common  work.  The  following 
examples  from  the  Scriptures  may  be  cited :  "Christ  died 
for  our  sins"  (1  Cor.  15:  3)  ;  of.  also  Gal.  1:4;  Eph.  5:2; 
"To  this  end  was  the  Son  of  God  manifested,  that  he  might 
destroy  the  works  of  the  devil"  (1  John  3:8);  "For  the 
Son  of  man  is  come  to  save  that  which  was  lost"  (Matt. 
18' :  11)  ;  "The  blood  of  Jesus  his  Son  cleanseth  us  from  all 
sin"  (1  John  1:7). 

We  can  therefore  say  that  God  or  the  Son  of  God  suffers, 
although  the  divine  nature  cannot  suffer,  but  only  the  hu- 
man nature.  The  suffering  of  the  human  nature  could  not 
per  se  make  atonement,  neither  could  the  divine  nature  per 
se  m.ake  atonement.  The  divine  nature  wills  this  atoning 
suffering,  permits  it,  assists  and  strengthens  the  human 
nature.  If  a  person  is  wounded,  as  for  instance  Paul,  it  is 
indeed  his  flesh  that  has  been  wounded,  and  yet,  although 
the  soul  cannot  be  wounded  in  the  ordinary  or  natural  sense, 
we  nevertheless  say  that. Paul,  or  the  person  of  Paul,  has 
been  wounded.     For  this  reason  we  cannot  agree  to  the 


226  CHUISTOI.OGY. 

explanation  of  ZwiNGLi,  who  says:  'The  man,  Jesus  Christ, 
who  at  the  same  time  is  God,  has  suffered."  The  Calvinists 
say  that  genus  apotelesmaticum  cannot  be  counted  with 
communicatio  idiomatum  and  that  both  natures  function 
each  by  itself  without  the  participation  of  the  other.  On 
this  point  Luther  writes  the  following  against  Zwingli:* 
"Zwingli  names  it  an  allceosis  when  anything  is  ascribed  to 
the  divine  nature  of  Christ,  which,  nevertheless,  is  a  prop- 
erty of  the  human  nature,  and  the  reverse.  For  example, 
where  it  is  said  in  Scripture,  'Behooved  it  not  the  Christ  to 
suffer  these  things,  and  to  enter  into  his  glory?'  On  this 
passage  Zwingli  triflingly  comments  that  the  term  Christ 
refers  to  his  human  nature.  Beware!  beware!  I  say  of  this 
allceosis,  for  it  is  a  mockery  of  Satan,  who  in  the  end  would 
set  up  a  Christ  whom  I  as  a  Christian  would  not  follow, 
inasmuch  as  this  allceosis  would  introduce  a  Christ  that 
could  accomplish  no  more  than  any  other  saint  with  his 
suffering  and  his  life.  For  if  I  believe  that  the  human 
nature  alone  has  suffered  for  me,  then  Christ  will  not  be 
to  me  a  Saviour  of  great  worth."  Then  the  Formula  of 
Concord,  which  contains  many  quotations  from  Luther, 
makes  this  observation:**  "From  all  this  it  is  evident  now 
that  man  errs  who  either  writes  or  says  that  the  expres- 
sions quoted:  God  suffers,  Cod  is  dead,  are  merely  verbales 
prsedicationes,  i.  e.,  simply  words  without  reality  or  founda- 
tion. Our  simple  Christian  faith  teaches  that  the  Son  of 
God,  who  has  become  man,  has  suffered  and  died  for  us 
and  redeemed  us  with  His  blood." 

This  genus  and  <Sio7rotV's  are  related,  but  genus  apoteles- 
maticum is  necessary,  because  it  emphasizes  the  communion 
of  activity  especially  with  regard  to  the  work  of  salvation. 
Communicatio  operationum  constitutes  a  refutation  of  the 
positions  of  both  Osiander  and  Stancarus.  The  former 
taught  that  Christ  was  our  Saviour  only  in  accordance  with 
His  divine  nature,  while  the  latter  declared  that  it  was  only 
in  accordance  with  His  human  nature.    We  find,  therefore, 

*  Miiller's  Symb.  Bucher,  p.  682,  39,  40. 
**  MiiHer's  Symb.  Bucher,  p.  684,  45. 


THE   TWO   STATES  OF   CltRIST.  227 

that  this  genus  has  profound  significance  in  relation  to  one 
of  the  cardinal  doctrines  of  Christianity,  viz.,  the  atone- 
ment. 

§19.     THE  TWO  STATES  OF  CHRIST. 

By  reason  of  the  necessity  of  the  atonement  for  the  salva- 
tion of  man  and  by  reason  of  the  impossibility  for  an  ordi- 
nary man  to  reconcile  God,  therefore  the  Son  of  God  must 
needs  become  man  and  as  the  God-man  reconcile  the  v^orld 
unto  God.  But  the  accomplishment  of  this  reconciliation 
demanded  self-renunciation  or  humiliation.  In  this  connec- 
tion we  must  note  especially  that  the  incarnation  and  the 
self-renunciation  are  not  identical  concepts,  inasmuch  as 
the  divine  nature  was  not  humiliated,  and  the  Son  of  God 
continues  to  be  a  man  in  His  state  of  exaltation.  The  man- 
ner of  the  incarnation  belongs  to  Christ's  humiliation,  but 
the  self-renunciation  must  be  more  deeply  conceived  and  is 
best  understood  when  we  consider  what  in  accordance  with 
genus  majestaticum  is  imparted  to  the  human  nature.  In- 
asmuch as  the  divine  nature  is  unchangeable,  therefore  the 
self-renunciation  must  have  reference  to  the  human  nature, 
which  is  also  the  case  with  the  exaltation,  although  con- 
sidered in  the  light  of  the  union  of  the  person.  On  this 
ground  the  states  of  Christ  are  two  in  number,  viz.,  the 
state  of  humiliation  (status  exinanitionis)  and  the  state  of 
exaltation  (status  exaltationis) . 

I.    The  State  of  Exinanition  or  Humiliation. 

1.     THE  DEFINITION  OF  HUMILIATION. 

Status  exinanitionis  is  the  state  of  Christ  in  which  He, 
as  to  His  human  nature,  abstained  from  the  continual  use 
of  the  divine  atty^ihutes  imparted  to  this  7iature.  KÖNIG 
gives  the  following  definition:*  "Self-renunciation  is  that 

*König:  "Exinanitio  est  status  6eav6pwTrov,  quo  secundum  humanam 
naturam  majestatis  divinse  use  plenario  et  incessante  realiter,  libere 
tamen  se  abdicavit,  ut  pro  commisso  in  protoplastis  deiformitatis  raptu 
justitise  Dei  satisfaceret." 


228  CIIUISTOLOGY. 

state  of  the  God-man  in  which  He  really  but  voluntarily 
renounced  as  to  His  human  nature  the  plenary  and  uninter- 
rupted exercise  of  His  divine  majesty,  in  order  that  He 
might  satisfy  the  justice  of  God  for  the  robbery  committed 
upon  our  first  parents  in  depriving  them  of  the  divine  like- 
ness." HOLLAZius  describes  the  state  of  humiliation  as 
consisting  of  the  following  four  requisites:*  1)  KeVwo-is  or 
the  "withholding  and  restraining  of  the  full  activity  of  the 
divine  majesty,  really  imparted  to  Christ  as  a  man";  2) 
X^i/^ts  ixop(f>^<i  SovAou,  or  that  He  took  upon  Himself  the  form 
of  a  servant;  3)  o/xotwo-is  åvOpw-n-wv,  or  His  likeness  to  the 
poorer  classes  of  men  in  birth,  education,  work,  walk  and 
conversation  among  men;  4 ) raTreiVwo-ts  t-Troo-rartKr/,  or  the  most 
humble,  active  and  passive  obedience. 

Before  we  proceed  with  the  development  of  this  doctrine 
we  would  consider  its  Scriptural  foundation  and  direct 
attention  especially  to  Phil.  2 :  6,  7 :  "Who,  existing  in  the 
form  of  God,"  or  "os  év  iJ.opcf>^  0£oD  {-Trapxwv."  The  form  of  God 
does  not  refer  to  the  essence  of  God  itself,  but  to  the  con- 
dition of  glory,  inasmuch  as  fJiopcf>rj  refers  to  the  endowment 
or  adornment  of  a  nature.  Still  He  was  the  Son  of  God, 
and  when  He  took  the  form  of  a  servant  {p.op4>rf  ^ovkov) ,  He 
did  not  lay  aside  the  form  of  God,  although  it  was  only  at 
times  that  He  used  divine  attributes.  He  therefore  con- 
tinued to  remain  divine  and  in  the  form  of  God.  We  read 
further:  "Counted  not  the  being  on  an  equality  with  God  a 

thing  to  be  grasped,"  or  "oi^  åpiru-ypov  rj-yy/aaTO  TO  elvai  icra  0£w." 

By  this  is  meant  that  it  would  not  have  been  robbery  if 
Christ  according  to  His  human  nature  had  made  use  of  the 
divine  attributes,  but  He  voluntarily  abstained  from  the 
full  exercise  of  the  attributes,  as  expressed  in  the  words: 
"But  emptied  (eKeVwo-ci')  himself,  taking  the  form  of  a  servant 
ixop(f)i]v  Sou'Aov)."  He  took  the  conditio  of  a  servant,  for  pop<py 
does  not  refer  to  the  nature  itself.  Jesus  had  assumed  and 
possessed  manhood,  but  even  in  His  exaltation  He  still  pos- 
sesses the  human  nature  and  shall  never  cease  to  be  the 
God-man. 

*  Hollazius  Exam.  Theol.  Acroam.     Part  III,  pp.  198,  199. 


THE   TWO   STATES   OF   CHRIST.  229 

Humiliation  or  self-renunciation  did  not  therefore  con- 
sist in  the  incarnation.  The  subject  in  incarnatio  is  Aoyo? 
ao-apKos,  but  the  subject  in  exinanitio  is  Aoyo?  tvo-apKo?.  Sub- 
jectum  quod  is  Christ;  subjectum  quo  is  the  human  nature. 
Self-renunciation  did  not  consist  in  a  complete  renunciation 
of  divinity,  for  in  that  case  the  personal  union  would  have 
ceased,  and  Christ  would  have  existed  as  an  ordinary  man. 
Neither  can  the  self-renunciation  imply  the  hidden  use  of 
the  divine  attributes  or  a  Kpui/zts  xpvctcoj?.  Furthermore,  we 
cannot  say  that  He  entirely  renounced  the  use  of  these 
attributes,  inasmuch  as  He  used  them  on  certain  occasions, 
as  in  the  performance  of  miracles  and  in  the  institution  of 
the  Lord's  Supper,  when  the  disciples  for  he  first  time  ate 
and  drank  His  body  and  blood.  Dogmaticians  have  adopted 
the  following  terms :  Kpyij/i^  Kpyja-ewi  or  the  concealment  of  the 
possession  and  partly  KcVwo-t?  XPW^^'^  or  the  self-renunciation 
in  regard  to  exercise. 

As  already  stated,  the  subject  of  exinanition  is  not  th*^ 
divine  nature.  The  states  of  exinanition  and  exaltation  do 
not  refer  to  the  divine  nature.  Logos  is  immutable  inas- 
much as  He  is  God.  Logos  as  incarnated  is  called  Jesus 
Christ.  Christ  suffered  humiliation  or  exinanition  accord- 
ing to  His  human  nature.  When  we  consider  the  contents 
of  Phil.  2:  6 — 8,  we  find  it  stated  that  Christ  Jesus  (not 
Logos) ,  being  in  the  form  of  God,  emptied  Himself  and  took 
the  form  of  a  servant.  As  Logos  He  did  not  exist  in  the 
form  of  God,  because  He  was  essentially  or  by  nature  God. 
The  incarnated  Logos  was  in  the  form  of  God  from  the  very 
moment  of  conception  or  incarnation  and  at  the  same  in- 
stant the  state  of  exinanition  began.  Christ  was  in  the 
form  of  God  throughout  the  whole  period  that  He  was  in 
the  form  of  a  servant,  in  the  likeness  of  men  in  their  ex- 
periences, and  was  found  in  fashion  as  a  man,  being  hungry, 
thirsty,  sleepy,  tired,  etc.  He  had  a  perfect  right  to  use  the 
divine  attributes  communicated  to  His  human  nature  and 
in  such  use  there  would  have  been  no  infringement  of  any 
divine  prerogative,  or  a  grasping  after  a  victor's  prize  or 
loot  for  Himself;   but  instead   of  doing  this   He  emptied 


230  CIIRISTOI.OGY. 

Himself  and  abstained  from  the  full  use  of  the  divine  attri- 
butes. We  have  already  stated  that  He  used  the  attributes 
occasionally,  as  in  the  miracles,  in  knowing  of  the  death  of 
Lazarus  and  at  the  institution  of  the  Sacramental  Supper, 
etc.  The  "form  of  a  servant"  does  not  mean  the  human 
nature  which  is  exalted,  inasmuch  as  the  form  of  a  servant 
has  ceased.  Christ  will  continue  to  be  divine-human  for 
ever  and  ever. 

Concerning  the  personal  union  and  the  imparting  of  the 
majesty  to  the  human  nature  the  Formula  of  Concord  pre- 
sents the  following  with  regard  to  the  states  of  Christ: 
"This  majesty,  according  to  the  personal  union,  He  (Christ) 
always  had,  and  yet,  in  the  state  of  humiliation  He  abstained 
from  it,  and,  on  this  account,  truly  grew  in  all  wisdom  and 
favor  with  God  and  men;  therefore  He  exercised  this  maj- 
esty, not  always,  but  as  often  as  it  pleased  Him.  Compare 
Epitome  VIH :  11.  Further  in  the  Solida  Declaratio 
Vni,  65=^= :  "At  the  time  of  the  humiliation  this  majesty 
which  was  imparted  to  the  human  nature  was  concealed 
and  withheld  for  the  greater  part."  In  another  place:** 
"Because  of  this  He  also  wrought  all  His  miracles  and 
manifested  His  divine  majesty  according  to  His  pleasure, 
when  and  as  He  willed,  and  therefore  not  only  after  His 
resurrection  and  ascension,  but  also  in  the  state  of  humilia- 
tion." According  to  Epitome  VHI :  20,  we  find  that  the 
Formula  of  Concord  emphasizes  that  only  the  human  nature 
was  humiliated  or  emptied  :t  "We  reject  and  condemn  also 
that  the  saying  of  Christ  (Matt.  28:  18),  'All  power  is  given 
unto  me  in  heaven  and  earth,'  is  thus  interpreted  and  blas- 
phemously perverted,  viz.,  that  to  Christ,  according  to  His 
divine  nature,  at  the  resurrection  and  ascension  to  heaven, 
was  restored,  i.  e.,  delivered  again  all  power  in  heaven  and 
on  earth,  as  though,  in  His  state  of  humiliation,  He  had 
also,  according  to  His  divinity,  divested  Himself  of  this  and 
abandoned  it." 


*  JVIiillers  Symb.  Bucher.  VIII,  p.  688,  65. 

**  Miiller's  Symb.  Bucher.  VIII,  p.  679,  25. 

t  Muller's  Symb.  Bucher,  VIII,  p.  550,  20. 


THE   TWO   STATES   OF   CHRIST.  231 

The  Confessions  have  not  treated  the  question  of  self- 
renunciation  in  an  exhaustive  manner,  indeed,  the  most 
important  points  have  only  been  touched  upon,  but  from 
the  passages  quoted  above  it  is  evident  that  the  old  con- 
servative Dogmaticians'  development  of  the  doctrine  was  in 
accord  with  the  tendency  manifested  in  the  Confession. 
The  last  quotation  sets  forth  clearly  that  Christ  according 
to  His  divine  nature  did  not  renounce  any  power  during 
the  period  of  His  humiliation.  Self-renunciation  has  ref- 
erence only  to  the  human  nature.  We  must  therefore  draw 
the  conclusion  that  in  accordance  with  His  divine  nature 
He  exercised  the  prerogatives  of  the  divine  majesty  during 
the  period  of  His  self-renunciation.  The  conception  of  the 
absolute  personality,  which  implies  that  God  is  triune, 
makes  it  clearly  manifest  that  two  of  the  persons  could  not 
perform  the  divine  works  independent  of  the  third.  To  be 
sure,  this  is  a  peculiar  condition,  especially  when  we  con- 
sider the  implications  of  unio  personalis,  viz.,  that  Christ 
as  one  person  in  accordance  with  the  one  nature  (divine) 
participated  in  the  divine  activity,  while  in  accordance  with 
the  other  nature  He  did  not  so  participate.  On  the  other 
hand,  it  certainly  would  be  an  inexplicable  situation  if  one 
of  the  persons  in  the  divine  being  would  for  a  considerable 
period  renounce  the  exercise  or  even  the  possession  of  the 
divine  attributes,  inasmuch  as  such  a  change  would  create  a 
disturbance  in  the  life  and  activity  of  the  divine  being.  In 
such  case  there  would  have  been  a  period  when  God  would 
have  ceased  to  be  triune,  or  as  two  persons  would  have 
exercised  the  internal  and  external  activity  of  the  Godhead, 
especially  the  latter.  Such  a  position  militates  just  as  much 
against  the  doctrine  of  the  divine  essence  as  the  Lutheran 
doctrine  of  self-renunciation  seems  to  conflict  with  the  doc- 
trine of  unio  personalis,  and  that  wherever  Christ  is,  there 
He  is  entire.  In  a  choice  between  different  views  from  the 
point  of  view  of  the  Christian  reason,  it  is  evident  that  the 
Lutheran  doctrine  of  self-renunciation  is  the  most  accept- 
able, for  it  does  not  encounter  as  many  difficulties  as  a 
theory  that  extends  the  self-renunciation  of  Christ  much 


232  CII  HISTOLOGY. 

% 

further.  The  objection  has  been  made  to  the  general  Lu- 
theran position  that  it  implies  a  duality  in  His  person,  in 
so  far  that  in  accordance  with  the  one  side  of  His  person 
He  is  omniscient,  while  in  accordance  with  the  other  side 
He  has  renounced  the  exercise  of  this  attribute.  He  is  both 
omniscient  and  He  is  not  omniscient.  Even  if  it  cannot  be 
satisfactorily  explained,  the  assertion  that  the  divine  nature 
has  renounced  omniscience  and  the  other  attributes  is  just 
as  inexplicable,  if  not  more  so.  We  must  therefore  assume 
that  Christ,  according  to  His  divine  nature,  knew  all  things, 
but  as  He,  according  to  His  human  nature,  became  con- 
scious of  the  possession  of  the  divine  attributes,  so  He  also 
according  to  the  same  nature  renounced  the  exercise  of 
omniscience,  etc. 

In  order  to  get  some  idea  of  how  Jesus  Christ  could  be 
omniscient  according  to  His  divine  nature  and  according  to 
His  human  nature  know  only  as  a  man,  we  may  use  some 
analogies  or  illustrations.  The  human  mind  of  Christ  dur- 
ing exinanition  stood  somewhat  in  the  same  relation  to 
Logos  or  the  divine  nature  as  a  prophet  to  the  Holy  Spirit, 
except  that  the  divine  and  human  natures  of  Christ  consti- 
tuted one  person.  The  prophet  would  not  know  more  of 
the  future  than  the  Spirit  revealed.  If  the  divine  nature 
had  continually  allowed  the  human  nature  to  use  omnis- 
cience and  all-wisdom,  Jesus  could  not  have  developed  as  a 
child  and  grown  in  knowledge  and  wisdom.  Sometimes  we 
cannot  recall  things  we  know,  but  in  another  minute  we 
may  remember  them.  In  the  same  way  our  subconscious 
mind  knows  things  which  our  conscious  mind  is  ignorant 
of.  Sometimes  in  awakening  from  sleep  the  subconscious 
mind  has  the  connection  and  we  know  things  that  we  other- 
wise would  never  know.  In  Christ  the  divine  nature  or 
Logos  was  always  present,  but  did  not  always  become  mani- 
fest and  work  through  the  human  nature.  The  sun  is  often 
dimmed  by  the  clouds.  When  Christ  said  that  concerning 
the  time  of  the  last  day  no  one  knew  except  the  Father,  He 
still  knew  it  according  tö  the  divine  nature,  but  could  not 
disclose  through  the  human  nature  by  the  ordinary  channels 


i 


THE   TWO  STATES  OF  CHRIST.  233 

why  it  was  as  if  unknown  according  to  the  human  con- 
sciousness. But  now,  in  the  state  of  exaltation  He  knows 
it  also  according  to  the  human  nature. 

Objection  has  likewise  been  made  to  our  doctrine  con- 
cerning omnipresence,  since,  it  is  said,  the  Logos  as  omni- 
present would  be  distinct  from  the  human  nature,  which 
had  renounced  omnipresence.  Such  a  distinction  comes  in 
conflict  with  unio  personalis.  The  following  answer  may 
be  given :  The  omnipresence  of  the  Son  of  God  is  neither 
extensive  nor  local,  the  union  of  the  human  nature  with  the 
divine  nature  is  not  dependent  on  space,  for  which  reason, 
as  united  with  the  human  nature,  He  could  be  everywhere 
present,  as  God  is  omnipresent,  without  being  locally  out- 
side of  the  human  nature  and  without  the  human  nature 
being  omnipresent  during  the  period  of  humiliation  through 
the  divine  nature.  Indeed,  the  self-renunciation  of  Christ 
consisted  in  renouncing  according  to  His  human  nature  the 
exercise  of  such  attributes.  His  prsesentia  intima  of  the 
two  natures  would  be  the  same  during  the  state  of  exinani- 
tion.  Krauth*  in  discussing  Christ's  presence  answers  a  Re- 
formed theologian  in  the  following  way:  "He  (the  Reformed 
theologian)  says:  'Before  the  Ascension  the  human  nature 
was  located  on  earth.'  With  this  proposition  as  a  positive 
one,  we  agree ;  but  if  it  means  that  even  when  on  earth  the 
human  nature  of  our  Lord  had  no  capacity  of  a  higher 
presence  through  the  divine  in  the  one  person,  our  Church 
would  deny  it.  Our  Lord  speaks  of  Himself  to  Nicodemus 
as  'He  that  came  down  from  heaven,  even  the  Son  of  man 
which  is  in  heaven.'  The  difference  between  our  Lord  on 
earth  and  in  glory  was  not  in  what  He  had  intrinsically, 
nor  in  what  He  had  the  ability  to  do,  but  in  what  He  volun- 
tarily exercised,  or  chose  to  forego.  His  humiliation  con- 
sisted in  the  ordinary  abnegation  of  the  use  of  the  powers 
which  abode  in  Him  intrinsically;  but  at  times  He  chose, 
even  on  earth,  to  reveal  that  glory.  He  allowed  the  form 
of  God  to  manifest  itself  in  His  transfiguration,  and  in  His 
miracles,  but  His  equality  with  God  was  none  the  more 

*   The   Conservative   Reformation   and  its   Theology,  p.   483. 


234  CIIIUSTOI.OCY. 

positive  then  than  when  His  sweat,  mingling  with  His 
blood,  fell  to  the  ground  in  Gethsemane.  He  moved  on 
earth  in  the  ordinary  voluntary  suspension  of  the  exercise 
of  His  great  prerogatives.  While  our  Church,  therefore, 
holds  most  firmly  that  His  human  nature  was  on  earth 
locally,  she  denies  that  it  had  no  other  power  of  presence 
than  the  local,  and  that  in  every  sense,  necessarily  and  un- 
changeably, it  was  on  earth  only." 

We  would  direct  attention  to  some  Scripture  passages 
which  prove  both  that  He  was  conscious  of  His  eternal 
divinity  during  His  humiliation,  and  that  He  was  not  hu- 
miliated as  to  His  divine  nature :  "Know  ye  not  that  I  must 
be  in  my  Father's  house?"  (Luke  2:  49)  ;  "No  one  hath 
ascended  into  heaven,  but  he  that  descended  out  of  heaven, 
even  the  Son  of  man,  who  is  in  heaven .  .  .  For  God  so  loved 
the  world,  that  he  gave  his  only  begotten  Son"  (John  3 :  13 
— 16)  ;  "Jesus  answered  them.  My  Father  worketh  even 
until  now,  and  I  work"  (John  5:  17)  ;  "The  Father  loveth 
the  Son  and  showeth  him  all  things  that  himself  doeth" 
(John  5 :  20)  ;  "I  came  forth  and  am  come  from  God"  (John 
8:  42)  ;  "Before  Abraham  was  born,  I  am"  John  8:  58)  ; 
"He  was  transfigured  before  them;  and  his  face  did  shine 
as  the  sun"  (Matt.  17:  2,  etc.)  ;  "We  beheld  his^lory,  glory 
as  of  the  only  begotten  from  the  Father"  (John  1 :  14)  ; 
"He  that  hath  seen  me  hath  seen  the  Father"  (John  14:  9)  ; 
"Who,  existing  in  the  form  of  God,  counted  not  the  being 
on  an  equality  with  God  a  thing  to  be  grasped"  (Phil.  2:6). 
These  passages  together  with  others  clearly  prove  that  He 
did  not  renounce  the  divine  nature  at  the  incarnation ;  nor 
is  there  any  intimation  that  He  was  humiliated  as  to  His 
divine  nature. 

That  the  self-renunciation  is  referred  to  the  human  na- 
ture is  evident  from  the  following  examples:  That  He  did 
not  use  His  power,  for  instance,  at  the  time  of  His  suffering, 
although  He  revealed  that  power  (John  18:  6;  13:  3)  ;  that 
He  did  not  know  of  the  location  of  Lazarus'  grave  (John 
11:  34),  nor  of  the  barrenness  of  the  fig  tree  (Matt.  21: 
19) ,  nor  of  the  judgment  day  (Matt.  24 :  36) .  He  renounced 


i 


THE   TWO   STATES   OF   CHRIST.  235 

His  operative  omnipresence :  "Lord,  if  thou  hadst  been 
here,  my  brother  had  not  died"  (John  11:  21).  He  re- 
nounced divine  worship  according  to  Heb.  2 :  7,  v^here  it  is 
stated  that  for  a  little  while  He  was  lower  than  the  angels. 
At  times,  however.  He  used,  in  accordance  with  the  will 
of  the  Father,  the  divine  attributes,  as  for  instance  in  the 
miracles.  Compare  the  following  passages :  Concerning 
Nathanael  (John  1:  48)  ;  concerning  the  life  of  the  Sama- 
ritan woman  (John  4:  17,  18)  ;  concerning  the  death  of 
Lazarus  (John  11:  11)  ;  concerning  the  institution  of  the 
Lord's  Supper  (Matt.  26:  26—28),  etc. 

2.     THE  GRADES  OF  EXINANITION  OR  THE  STATE  OF  HUMILIA- 
TION. 

The  humiliation  or  self-renunciation  of  Christ,  which 
consisted  chiefly  in  abstaining  from  the  exercise  of  the 
divine  majesty  in  regard  to  the  human  nature,  is  made 
manifest  in  a  variety  of  ways  by  reason  of  His  development 
and  experiences  during  His  earthly  life,  for  Christ  had  a 
human  history  after  His  assumption  of  the  form  of  a 
servant,  being  made  in  the  likeness  of  men,  and  being  found 
in  fashion  as  a  man.  The  various  stages  or  grades  of 
Christ's  humiliation  are  the  following:  1)  Conception.  The 
humiliation  consisted  in  the  assumption  of  a  human  nature 
that  was  conceived,  because  He  could  have  become  man  in 
some  other  way.  Neither  Adam  nor  Eve  came  into  being 
through  conception.  Eve  belonged  to  the  offspring  of  Adam, 
although  she  was  not  brought  forth  in  the  ordinary  way; 
2)  birth.  The  humiliation  consisted  in  the  manner  of  His 
birth  and  in  the  humiliating  external  circumstances  that 
surrounded  it;  3)  circumcision.  Although  He  was  the 
Master  of  the  Law,  still  He  subjected  Himself  also  to  the 
demands  of  the  ceremonial  law  and  fulfilled  all  righteous- 
ness; 4)  education,  according  to  which  He  subjected  Him- 
self to  the  laws  of  domestic  life  and  rendered  obedience ; 
5)  intercourse  ivith  all  sorts  and  conditions  of  men,  by 
which  He  must  needs  bear  with  many  things  and  suffer 
much  because  of  the  ignorance  and  cruel  judgments  of  men ; 


236  CHBISTOLOGY. 

6)  His  great  suffering,  which,  particularly  with  regard  to 
the  manner  of  it,  implied  many  insults  and  deep  humilia- 
tion, yea,  the  self-renunciation  in  dereliction;  7)  His  death, 
the  manner  of  which  was  also  degrading;  8)  burial.  This 
also  brought  a  new  humiliation  upon  Christ,  who,  while 
sinless,  must  needs  experience  the  wages  of  sin. 

3.     THE  NEW  DEVELOPMENT  OF  THE  KENOSIS  DOCTRINE. 

Inasmuch  as  the  Christological  question  is  one  of  the  most 
important  in  Dogmatics,  and  inasmuch,  furthermore,  as  the 
doctrine  of  Kenosis  has  been  one  of  the  burning  questions 
in  our  Church,  therefore  it  is  necessary  to  dwell  on  the 
modern  development  of  this  doctrine.  Modern  Kenotism 
sets  forth  that  the  human  nature  of  Christ  together  with 
the  true  human  development  is  greatly  denuded  of  its  sig- 
nificance through  the  old  Dogmatic  doctrine  of  self-renunci- 
ation, which  stresses  the  hypostatic  unity,  while  neverthe- 
less teaching  the  partial  renunciation  of  only  one  nature. 
The  Kenosis  is  conceived  of  in  a  more  profound  way,  making 
the  self-renunciation  more  complete,  the  Logos  being  hum- 
bled even  according  to  His  divine  nature.  To  be  sure,  the 
Second  Person  of  the  Trinity  did  not  abstain  from  anything 
essentially  divine,  but  did  renounce  the  divine  form  of  being 
for  the  human  mode  of  existence.  He  was  still  God,  but 
His  divine  nature  was  modified  as  to  its  mode  of  existence 
and  activity  in  order  to  conform  to  the  requirements  of 
human  life.  The  divine  attributes  were  present  in  Christ 
from  the  beginning  in  partial  and  involved  form,  from 
which  a  development  afterwards  took  place.  The  Kenotists 
hold  that  when  the  Logos  out  of  His  free  will  and  love 
withdrew  to  a  condition  of  potentiality  or  to  His  innermost 
centrum  in  accordance  with  the  will  and  love  of  the  Father 
and  the  Holy  Ghost,  this  did  not  act  as  a  disturbing  element 
in  the  immanent  Trinity.  The  participation  of  the  Son  in 
the  government  of  the  world  is  not  considered  to  be  thereby 
disturbed  in  any  essential,  since  He  participates  in  a  special 
way,  viz.,  in  the  redemption  of  the  world.  The  Kenotic 
view  has  been  presented  from  time  to  time  in  more  or  less 


Å 


THE   TWO   STATES   OF   CHRIST.  237 

radical  form,  but  it  always  implies  that  the  divine  nature, 
in  addition  to  the  human,  renounced  the  use  and  exercise 
of  the  divine  attributes,  at  least  the  relative.  According  to 
this  view  Christ  renounced  at  His  incarnation,  even  as  to 
His  divine  nature,  such  attributes  as  power,  omniscience 
and  omnipresence.  In  answer  to  the  question  as  to  whether 
Christ  would  then  be  God,  the  Kenotists  say  that  if  He 
could  not  renounce  such  attributes,  then  His  incarnation 
was  an  appearance  merely,  or  else  there  was  a  contra- 
dictory duality  in  His  mode  of  being.  In  His  essence  God 
is  self -determinative  and  also  He  is  absolute  love.  His  love 
demanded  the  incarnation.  In  such  case  the  other  attri- 
butes could  not  stand  in  the  way  of  love.  If,  in  His  love. 
He  willed  to  become  a  true  man,  then  His  unchangeableness 
could  not  hinder  Him  from  so  doing,  for  this  attribute  also 
implied  active  love.  Hence  He  could  also,  as  to  His  divine 
nature,  renounce  the  relative  attributes  during  the  period 
of  His  humiliation.  To  the  objection  that  in  such  case  the 
divine  love  of  the  Logos  would  cease  in  His  state  of  humilia- 
tion, the  Kenotists  answer  that  the  divine  attributes  were 
not  nullified,  but  were  preserved  and  reduced  to  such  a  form 
as  would  fit  into  the  human  development. 

Although  the  modern  development  of  the  doctrine  of  the 
Kenosis  from  certain  points  of  view  would  seem  to  be  more 
natural  and  rational  than  the  position  of  the  old  Lutheran 
Dogmaticians,  still  the  objections  to  Kenotism  are  more 
powerful  than  those  against  the  older  orthodox  view.  We 
have  already  pointed  out  the  disturbing  element  in  the  ac- 
tivity of  the  immanent  Trinity,  which  is  a  consequence  of 
the  Kenotic  position.  Since  God  is  an  absolute  personality, 
who  exists  in  three  relative  persons,  not  as  three  men,  but 
self-conscious  and  self-determinative  subjects  by  reason  of 
their  participation  in  the  one  self-conscious  and  self-deter- 
minative divine  essence,  so  that  there  are  not  three  that 
are  separately  self-conscious,  nor  three  that  are  separately 
all-powerful,  nor  three  that  are  omniscient,  but  one  self- 
conscious,  all-powerful  and  omniscient,  how  would  it  be 
possible  for  one  of  the  persons  in  the  Godhead  in  His  divine 


238  CIIKISTOLOGY. 

capacity  to  renounce  the  divine  power  or  any  other  attri- 
bute? According  to  the  more  radical  Kenotists  Jesus  Christ 
becomes  a  mere  man,  according  to  the  less  radical  He  be- 
comes almost  exclusively  a  man  during  the  period  of  His 
humiliation.  Even  if  this  would  imply  a  transformation 
as  to  the  mode  of  being,  still  the  divinity  has  been  with- 
drawn so  far  into  the  background  that  there  is  ample  reason 
for  the  question:  How  could  Christ  perform  the  work  of 
atonement  with  the  emphasis  placed  so  much  more  strongly 
on  the  human  than  on  the  divine  nature,  and  with  the  latter 
reduced  to  a  mere  potency? 

II.    The  State  of  Exaltation. 

1.     THE  DEFINITION  OF  EXALTATION. 

Status  exaltationis  is  that  state  of  Christ  in  ivhich  He 
laid  aside  the  form  of  a  servant  and  resumed,  also  according 
to  His  human  7iatiire,  the  fidl,  general  and  uninterrupted 
exercise  of  the  divine  attributes,  ivhich  He  received  accord- 
ing to  His  human  nxitiire  at  the  i7icarnation  and  which  He 
had.  possessed  dining  the  state  of  humiliatioyi.  Subjectum 
quod  is  Christ,  because  on  the  ground  of  unio  personalis  we 
can  say  that  Christ  was  exalted,  but  subjectum  quo  is  the 
human  nature,  inasmuch  as  the  divine  nature  cannot  per 
se  be  exalted. 

Among  Scripture  passages  that  refer  to  the  doctrine  of 
exaltation  the  following  may  be  cited:  "Thou  hast  made 
him  but  little  lower  than  God,  and  crownest  him  with  glory 
and  honor.  Thou  makest  him  to  have  dominion  over  the 
works  of  thy  hands ;  Thou  hast  put  all  things  under  his 
feet"  (Ps.  8:  5.  6)  ;  "Even  as  thou  gavest  him  authority 
over  all  flesh"  (John  17:  2)  ;  "Him  did  God  exalt  with  his 
right  hand  to  be  a  Prince  and  a  Saviour"  (Acts  5:  31)  ; 
"Wherefore  also  God  highly  exalted  him,  and  gave  unto  him 
the  name  which  is  above  every  name"  (Phil.  2:  9 — 11;  cf. 
Heb.  2:  7,  8). 


THE   TWO   STATES   OF   CHRIST.  239 

2.     THE  GRADES  OF  EXALTATION. 

The  exaltation  of  Christ,  beginning  with  the  quickening 
of  Christ  (1  Pet.  3:  18),  consists  of  the  following  grades: 
the  descent  into  Hades,  the  resurrection,  the  ascension  and 
the  sitting  at  the  right  hand  of  God. 

The  Lutheran  Church  regards  1  Peter  3 :  18  as  the  leading 
sedes  doctrinse  in  determining  the  descent  into  Hades  as  the 
first  degree  in  the  state  of  exaltation,  and  the  Reformed 
Church  bases  her  view  on  Acts  2 :  27  and  looks  upon  the 
descent  into  Hades  as  belonging  to  the  state  of  humiliation. 
Note  the  translation  in  A.  R.  V.  of  Acts  2  :  27,  "unto  Hades." 
It  does  not  speak  of  descent. 

Resurrectio  interna  or  iMOTTolrjTt^;  is  the  quickening  of 
Christ,  which  denotes  liberation  from  death  and  therefore 
the  union  of  soul  and  body.  The  communion  of  the  natures 
did  not  cease  when  Christ  died.  The  divine  nature  was  in 
communion  with  both  soul  and  body,  but  Christ  was  in 
Paradise  as  to  His  soul  or  spirit,  while  His  body  rested  in 
the  grave.  Compare  the  words  of  Jesus  to  the  thief  on  the 
cross:  "To-day  shalt  thou  be  with  me  in  Paradise"  (Luke 
23  :  43) .  Paradise  was  the  place  of  the  blessed  in  the  world 
of  the  spirits  or  the  blessed  intermediate  state.  In  that 
sense  Christ  was  in  Paradise  until  the  resurrection  morn. 
Early  on  Sunday  morning,  i.  e.,  on  the  third  day  after  His 
death,  the  quickening,  or  resurrectio  interna,  took  place. 
Between  death  and  the  quickening  our  Lord  was  not  in 
Hades  or  the  kingdom  of  the  dead,  which  in  the  New  Testa- 
ment means  the  place  of  the  unbelievers  in  the  world  of  the 
spirit  or  during  the  intermediate  state.  Between  death  and 
the  quickening  He  was  in  the  kingdom  of  the  dead  only  in 
the  sense  that  Paradise  was  the  place  of  the  blessed  in  that 
kingdom.  In  this  connection  we  quote  the  following  pas- 
sage: "Neither  was  he  left  unto  Hades,  nor  did  his  flesh  see 
corruption"  (Acts  2:  31).  Inasmuch  as  Christ  was  sinless, 
and  the  work  of  atonement  was  finished,  therefore,  it  was 
not  necessary  that  His  body  should  see  corruption.     After 


240  CIiniSTOLOGY. 

He  had  been  restored  to  life  He  descended  to  the  world  of 
unbelievers  or  the  real  kingdom  of  the  dead. 

1)  Descensus  ad  inferos,  or  the  descent  to  the  Lower 
World. — The  place  to  which  He  descended  is  called  in  Eph. 
4:  9  the  lower  parts  of  the  earth  or  KiTMrepa,  and  in  1  Peter 
3:  19  prison  or  cj^vXaKy.  In  His  entire  person  Christ  de- 
scended to  the  lower  world  after  the  quickening.  The  entire 
God-man  or  divine  person  descended  into  Hades  according 
to  the  human  nature  which  from  the  time  of  the  quickening 
had  spiritual  properties,  and,  therefore,  TrvévixuTt.  The  ex- 
pression TTvévfxaTL  does  not  conflict  with  this,  rather  it 
strengthens  the  view  that  He  descended  in  His  entire  per- 
son, for  He  was  alive  in  the  spirit  in  Paradise  also.  The 
words  "made  alive  in  the  spirit"  (1  Peter  3:  18)  have 
reference  to  the  resurrectio  interna.  Through  His  divine 
power  and  in  a  divine  way  He  betook  Himself  with  His 
pneumatic  body  to  Hades.  His  descent  was  venis  et 
realis,  but  did  not  take  place  in  a  local  way,  humanly  speak- 
ing, but  swpernaturalis.  We  ought,  however,  to  observe 
that  He  descended  (Eph.  4:9)  to  the  lower  parts  of  the 
earth,  or  as  in  1  Peter  3 :  19,  irop^vBu-i.  But  expressions  like 
lower  parts  of  the  earth,  prison  or  Hades  do  not  explain 
the  exact  locality. 

Concerning  the  object  of  the  descent  the  Confessions 
declare  that  He  overcame  the  devil  and  all  his  power.  We 
quote  the  following  from  Solida  Declaratio  9:*  "We  simply 
believe  that  the  entire  person,  God  and  man,  after  the  burial 
descended  into  hell  (ad  inferos),  conquered  the  devil,  de- 
stroyed the  power  of  hell  (potestam  inferorum  everterit) 
and  deprived  the  devil  of  all  his  might."  It  was  therefore 
a  triumph  and  not  a  suffering  of  the  pangs  of  hell.  These 
He  had  suffered  before  His  death,  which  is  evident  from 
His  words  on  the  cross:  "It  is  finished."  In  Col.  2:  15  we 
read:  "Having  despoiled  the  principalities  and  the  powers, 
he  made  a  show  of  them  openly,  triumphing  over  them  in 
it."  In  Rev.  1 :  18  Christ  says :  "I  have  the  keys  of  death 
and  of  Hades." 

*  Muller's  Symb.  Bucher,  p.  6967697" 


THE   TWO   STATES   OF  CHRIST.  241 

With  regard  to  the  preaching  spoken  of  in  1  Peter  3:18 
■ — 20,  the  old  Dogmaticians  say  that  it  was  verbalis  and 
realis.  They  furthermore  characterize  it  as  non  evangelica 
but  legalis,  elenchtica  and  terrihilis.  To  the  question,  "Why 
did  Christ  preach  in  Hades  to  those  alone  who  were  unbe- 
lieving at  the  time  of  Noah?'  the  reply  is  given:  a)  Others 
are  not  excluded,  but  these  are  presented  as  special  exam- 
ples; b)  these  are  named  in  order  to  teach  that  the  people 
before  the  flood  should  have  believed  in  Christ  according 
to  the  testimonies  from  the  time  of  Adam  and  Enoch  and 
especially  by  the  preaching  of  Noah;  c)  the  apostle  Peter 
in  his  discussion  of  Baptism  wished  to  refer  to  the  time  of 
Noah  when  the  ark  was  built,  wherein  eight  souls  were 
saved  through  water. 

Many  of  the  more  modern  theologians,  as  well  as  some  of 
the  older  Church  Fathers,  have  declared  that  Christ  also 
preached  to  those  who  were  in  the  place  of  the  blessed  in 
the  kingdom  of  the  dead.  They  consider  that  before  Christ 
preached  in  Hades  it  consisted  of  two  divisions,  one  for  the 
damned  and  the  other  for  the  blessed,  the  latter  place  called 
Abraham's  bosom  or  Paradise.  Christ  preached  first  in  the 
place  of  the  damned  and  afterwards  in  Paradise.  Those 
that  support  this  view  refer  to  1  Peter  3 :  18' — 20  as  having 
reference  to  the  preaching  in  the  place  of  the  damned,  and 
1  Peter  4:  6  to  the  preaching  in  Paradise.  The  object  of 
the  preaching  in  Paradise  was  to  declare  to  the  believers 
of  the  Old  Covenant  the  completion  of  the  work  of  salva- 
tion, liberate  them  from  the  kingdom  of  the  dead  and  trans- 
fer them  together  with  Paradise  to  heaven,  which  took 
place  at  the  ascension  of  Christ.  The  proofs  presented  by 
the  proponents  of  this  theory  are  that  in  1  Peter  4:  6  the 
verb  emyyeAt'^wis  used,  while  in  1  Peter  3 :  19  the  verb  KT/puVo-w 
is  used.  The  latter  verb  may  include  either  legal  or  evan- 
gelical preaching,  while  the  former  means  to  preach  the 
Gospel.  The  conclusion  is  therefore  drawn  that  1  Peter  3 : 
19  has  reference  to  legal  preaching  directed  to  the  evil 
spirits  and  the  damned,  while  1  Peter  4 :  6  refers  to  the 
blessed  declaration  to  the  old  fathers  who  had  awaited  the 

Dogmatics.      9. 


242  c  II  HISTOLOGY. 

fulfillment  of  the  promise.  They  were  indeed  comforted  as 
being  in  the  place  of  the  blessed,  but  they  were  still  in  the 
kingdom  of  the  dead  and  could  not  be  liberated  therefrom 
before  Christ  had  finished  the  work  of  atonement.  In  fur- 
ther proof  Eph.  4:  8  is  quoted,  where  it  is  stated,  "When 
he  ascended  on  high,  he  led  captivity  captive."  In  the  con- 
text Paul  speaks  of  the  descent  into  the  lower  parts  of  the 
earth.  The  assertion  is  made  that  where  these  expressions 
are  used  in  the  Old  Testament  the  reference  is  to  the  taking 
captive  of  friends.  Compare  Judges  5 :  12.  Barak  took  his 
friends  captive.  Therefore  the  conclusion  is  drawn  that 
Christ  took  captive  His  friends.  He  brought  them  with 
Him  to  heaven.  This  explains,  it  is  said,  why  in  the  Old 
Testament  the  faithful  believed  that  they  went  down  in 
death,  while  in  the  New  Covenant  the  thought  is  prevalent 
that  Paradise  is  up  in  heaven.  This  theory,  which  has  been 
briefly  described,  is  still  an  open  question.  The  Confessions 
do  not  refer  to  this  matter.  They  only  present  the  practical 
significance  of  the  descent  into  Hades. 

2)  Rei<Hrrectio  externa,  or  resurrection  in  the  ordinary 
sense. — Hollazius  defines  the  resurrection  in  the  following 
way:*  "The  resurrection  is  the  act  of  glorious  victory  by 
which  Christ,  the  (iod-man,  through  the  same  power  as  that 
of  the  Father  and  the  Holy  Spirit,  brought  forth  His  body 
from  the  tomb,  reunited  with  the  soul  and  glorified,  and  by 
various  proofs  showed  it  alive  to  His  disciples,  for  the  con- 
firmation of  our  peace,  fellowship,  joy,  and  hope  in  our  own 
future  resurrection."  The  activity  of  Christ  in  the  act  of 
resurrection  does  not  conflict  with  those  passages  which 
state  that  the  Father  raised  up  the  Son  from  the  dead,  in- 
asmuch as  the  doctrine  of  the  Trinity  implies  that  the  Son 
was  also  active.  The  divine  nature  gave  power  to  the  hu- 
man nature  to  arise.  Per  se  the  divine  nature  did  not  need 
to  arise,  but  by  reason  of  the  personal  union  the  entire 
person  arose.  Sxbjectum.  quod  is  Christ.  Subjectum  quo 
is  the  human  nature,  and  subjectum  projcimum  is  the  body 
of  Christ. 

*  Hoi.  Exaniin.  Theol.  Acroam.     Pars  III,  SI,  Cap.  iii.  p.  214. 


THE   TWO    STATES   OF   CHRIST.  243 

The  body  with  which  Ch^rist  arose  was  the  same  body 
which  He  possessed  in  His  state  of  humiliation,  but  it  was 
tranformed,  and  in  Phil.  3 :  21  it  is  called  "the  body  of  his 
glory."  It  was  a  pneumatic  body  with  all  the  attributes 
that  characterize  a  body  of  that  kind.  Apart  from  the  fact 
that  His  body  was  not  to  be  subject  to  corruption,  the  iden- 
tity is  clearly  set  forth  in  such  passages  as  the  following: 
Matt.  28  :  9 ;  Luke  24  :  37—43  ;  John  20  :  27 ;  Acts  1 :  8.  The 
many  manifestations  during  the  forty  days  clearly  prove 
that  His  body  was  real,  although  pneumatic. 

The  proofs  for  the  resurrection  of  Christ  are  incontro- 
vertible and  satisfying  to  every  reasonable  thinker  both 
from  the  Biblical  and  rational  standpoint.*  "There  is  no 
historical  fact  better  attested  than  the  resurrection  of 
Christ.  This  is  a  comforting  truth,  especially  when  we 
consider  the  great  significance  of  the  resurrection.  This 
significance  is  pointed  out  in  such  Scripture  passages  as 
the  following :  "If  Christ  hath  not  been  raised,  your  faith 
is  vain;  ye  are  yet  in  your  sins"  (1  Cor.  15:  17)  ;  "Who  was 
delivered  up  for  our  trespasses,  and  was  raised  for  our 
justification"  (Rom.  4:  25)  ;  "Begat  us  again  unto  a  living 
hope  by  the  resurrection  of  Jesus  Christ  from  the  dead" 
(1  Peter  1:3);  "I  live,  ye  shall  live  also"  (John  14:  19)  ; 
"Knowing  that  he  that  raised  up  the  Lord  Jesus  shall  raise 
up  us  also  with  Jesus"  (2  Cor.  4:  14;  cf.  1  Cor.  15)  ;  "As 
Christ  was  raised  from  the  dead  through  the  glory  of  the 
Father,  so  we  also  might  walk  in  the  newness  of  life"  (Rom. 
6:4).  The  resurrection,  therefore,  has  a  fundamental  sig- 
nificance for  Christianity. 

3)  Asceyisus  in  cmlum. — Hollazius  defines  the  ascension 
as  follows:**  "The  ascension  is  the  glorious  act  of  Christ 
by  which,  after  having  been  resuscitated,  He  betook  Himself, 
according  to  His  human  nature,  by  a  real,  true  and  local 
motion,  according  to  His  voluntary  determination  (per 
liberam  CEConomian),  and  in  a  visible  manner  unto  the 
clouds,  and  thence  in  an  invisible  manner  into  the  common 

*  Compare  Apologetics  by  Lindberg,  p.  117. 
**  Examin.  Theol.     Pars  III,  §1,  Cap.  in.  p.  218. 


244  CIIRISTOI.OGY. 

heaven  of  the  blessed,  and  to  the  very  throne  of  God;  so 
that,  having  triumphed  over  His  enemies.  He  might  occupy 
the  kingdom  of  God,  and  reopen  the  closed  Paradise,  and 
prepare  a  permanent  inheritance  for  us  in  heaven."  Com- 
pare Acts  1 :  2,  9—11 ;  3  :  21 ;  Eph.  4 :  10 ;  Heb.  4  :  14.  We  do 
not  interpret  Se^Wöat  in  Acts  3 :  21  passively,  as  the  Cal- 
vinists  do,  but  actively,  since  the  verb  is  deponent  and  the 
construction  requires  it,  for  we  read  ovpavov  and  not  v-n-''  ovpavov. 
The  ascension  of  Christ  was  not  an  a<^ui'to-/Aos  or  a  disap- 
pearing, but  a  real  ascension;  neither  after  He  had  dis- 
appeared in  the  sky  were  there,  humanly  speaking,  succes- 
sive steps  in  a  journey  through  all  the  planetary  heavens 
till  He  had  reached  the  coelum  empyreum. 

4)  Sessio  ad  dextram  Dei. — HOLLAZius  defines  as  fol- 
lows:* "The  sitting  at  the  right  hand  of  God  is  the  highest 
degree  of  glory,  in  which  Christ,  the  (iqd-man,  having  been 
exalted,  as  to  His  human  nature,  to  the  throne  of  divine 
majesty,  most  powerfully  and  by  His  immediate  presence 
governs  all  things  which  are  in  the  kingdom  of  power,  grace 
and  glory,  for  the  glory  of  His  own  name,  and  for  the  solace 
and  safety  of  the  afflicted  Church."  The  right  hand  of  God 
is  not  to  be  construed  locally,  as  the  Reformed  do,  for  it 
implies  infinite  dominion  and  therefore  also  omnipresence. 
The  old  Dogmaticians  held  various  opinions  concerning  this 
omniprassentia.  But  when  we  say  that  Christ  in  His  state 
of  exaltation  also  in  accordance  with  His  human  nature 
possessed  and  exercised  absolute  omnipresence,  this  does 
not  imply  the  ubiquity  of  the  body  of  Christ  in  the  sense 
that  the  Reformed  misinterpret  the  Lutheran  doctrine.  Our 
Church  teaches  that  in  one  sense  the  body  of  Christ  is 
definitive  in  heaven,  and  that  in  another  and  just  as  real 
a  sense  He  is  omnipresent  even  as  to  His  body  through  the 
divine  nature,  since  it  is  impossible  to  divide  the  person  of 
Christ.  The  Reformed  Church  teaches  that  Christ  is  omni- 
present only  in  accordance  with  His  divine  nature.  Among 
Bible  passages  that  refer  to  Christ's  sitting  at  the  right 

*Exam.  Thcol.     Pars  III,  §1,  Cap.  iii,  p.  221. 


THE   TWO    STATES    OF   CHRIST.  245 

hand  of  the  Father  we  may  quote  the  following:  "So  then 
the  Lord  Jesus,  after  he  had  spoken  unto  them,  was  received 
up  into  heaven,  and  sat  down  at  the  right  hand  of  God" 
(Mark  16:  19)  ;  "That  he  might  fill  all  things"  (Eph.  4: 
10)  ;  "But  of  which  of  the  angels  hath  he  said  at  any  time, 
sit  thou  on  my  right  hand,  till  I  make  thine  enemies  the 
footstool  of  thy  feet?"  (Heb.  1:  13)  ;  "Who  is  on  the  right 
hand  of  God,  having  gone  into  heaven;  angels  and  authori- 
ties and  powers  being  made  subject  unto  him'  (1  Peter 
3:  22). 

III.    Notes  on  the  History  of  Dogma. 

There  were  no  real  controversies  concerning  the  states 
of  Christ  and  therefore  there  was  no  dogmatic  development 
before  the  period  of  the  Reformation.  The  Lutheran  and 
the  Reformed  Churches  held  divergent  views  also  on  the 
renunciation.  The  representatives  of  the  Reformed  Church 
did  not  consider  that  the  subject  of  the  renunciation  could 
be  the  Son  of  God  as  incarnated,  but  the  Logos  as  pre- 
existing, since  the  God-man  as  such  was  not  in  the  form  of 
God  according  to  the  Reformed  view.  In  a  certain  sense 
the  Reformed  Church  considered  that  the  renunciation  re- 
ferred to  both  natures,  although  the  incarnation  and  the 
renunciation  were  almost  identical.  The  human  nature  was 
humiliated  in  comparison  with. the  subsequent  exaltation. 
When  the  Lutheran  Church  emphasized  communicatio  idio- 
matum,  the  Reformed  Church  set  forth  the  activity  of  the 
Holy  Spirit  on  the  incarnated  Son.  In  the  Lutheran  Church 
there  arose  different  tendencies  owing  to  the  divergent 
views  presented  by  Brentz  and  Chemnitz.  To  a  certain 
extent  this  explains  the  controversy  between  the  Giessen 
and  Tubingen  schools.  These  schools  both  acknowledged 
that  Christ  possessed  the  divine  attributes  during  the  state 
of  humiliation ;  the  question  in  controversy  was  as  to  their 
use.  The  Tiibingen  theologians  advocated  a  cryptic  view 
that  was  related  to  gnostic  Docetism,  while  the  Giessen 
theologians  supported  a  Kenotic  conception  in  line  with 
Chemnitz.     But  the  real  controversy  on  Kenotism  belongs 


246  (  iiitisioi.odY. 

to  more  recent  times,  and  the  modern  doctrine  of  Kenosis 
does  not  agree  with  the  view  of  Chemnitz.  The  modern 
Kenotism  teaches  that  the  Son  of  God  at  His  incarnation 
depotentiated  and  emptied  Himself  not  only  with  regard 
to  the  divine  glory,  but  also  with  regard  to  the  mode  of 
existence.  Among  advocates  of  the  Kenotic  theory  may  be 
mentioned  Thomasius,  (Jess,  Liebner,  Lange,  Kahnis,  J. 
Miiller,  Ebrard  and  Godet.  Dorner  criticised  the  Kenotic 
theory  and  presented  a  view  of  his  own  which  implied  a 
contradiction  and  stated  that  the  incarnation  was  not  com- 
pleted before  the  resurrection  of  Jesus.  This  view  of 
Dorner  has  not  won  many  adherents.  Many  divergent  the- 
ories continually  make  their  appearance.  We  subjoin  de- 
tailed notes  on  the  history  of  dogma  concerning  the  states 
of  Christ  and  especially  the  renunciation. 

Justin  Maktyk.  Irknmus.  Clement  of  Alexandria.  Okicen  and  others 
taught  that  Jesus  after  His  death  had  preached  to  the  spirits  in  the 
spiritual  world  and  that  He  had  liberated  the  faithful  of  the  Old  Testa- 
ment dispensation  from  the  place  of  the  blessed  in  the  kingdom  of  th3 
dead  and  taken  them  to  heaven.  Tektullian  stated  that  a  change  had 
taken  place  through  His  birth,  but  the  Son  had  not  ceased  to  be  what 
He  was.  Ouigen  taught  that  the  Son  humbled  Himself  when  He  ba- 
came  a  man,  but  the  divine  in  Christ  was  unchanged.  As  Logos  He 
could  neither  be  humiliated  nor  exalted. 

Hilary  of  Poitieks  set  forth  that  the  Logos  humbled  Himself  at  the 
incarnation  in  such  manner  that  He  held  back  the  fulness  of  His 
glory,  which  he  calls  evaruatiö.  The  divine  nature  was  not  in  any 
sense  destroyed,  but  remained  unchanged.  Ei'Iphanix's  and  Jekome 
taught  that  Christ  had  descended  to  the  lower  regions  of  Hades  only 
in  the  soul.  Aici^tine,  in  presenting  the  doctrine  of  the  descent  into 
hell  in  his  164th  letter,  says  that  only  unbelievers  deny  this  doctrine. 

Thomas  Aquinas  said  that  the  descent  of  Christ  into  hell  was  not 
personal,  but  only  the  work  of  His  spirit.  Duns  Scotis  did  not  con- 
sider the  doctrine  of  the  descent  into  hell  as  Biblical. 

.^pix  taught  that  the  descent  into  hell  was  the  suffering  of  Christ. 
He  suffered  the  anguish  of  hell.  When  the  body  of  Christ  lay  in  the 
grave.  His  soul  was  in  Hades.  Calvin  set  forth  that  the  descent  into 
hell  consisted  in  the  sufferings  of  Christ.  Paksimonius  denied  that 
hell  was  a  place,  stating  that  it  was  merely  a  condition.  For  this 
reason  Christ  did  not  descend  in  reality,  it  was  merely  a  change  in 
condition.  Beza.  like  Bucek  before  him,  said  that  the  descent  was 
equivalent  to  the  burial.    Later  on  Lutkeman  taught  that  Christ  ceased 


THE    TWO    STATES   OF   CHRIST.  247 

to  be  a  man  when  He  lay  in  the  grave.  This  view  conflicted  with  the 
Lutheran  doctrine  of  communio  naturarum  as  a  result  of  unio  per- 
sonalis. With  regard  to  the  communication  of  the  divine  attributes 
to  the  human  nature  of  Christ  and  also  with  regard  to  the  states  of 
Christ  th:;  Reformed  Church  did  not  sanction  the  Lutheran  doctrine 
cf  communicatio  idiomatum  and  referred  the  renunciation  and  exalta- 
tion to  the  two  natures  of  Christ.  The  divine  nature  was  humiliated 
by  concealing  itself  under  Christ's  assumed  form  of  a  servant  (occul- 
tatio).  Brkxtz  differed  from  Chemnitz  in  the  doctrine  of  the  com- 
munication of  the  attributes  and  in  the  use  and  exercise  of  the  divine 
attributes  in  the  state  of  humiliation.  Brentz  conceived  of  the  divine 
attributes  as  having  been  poured  out  over  the  human  nature  of  Christ, 
becoming  its  real  possession.  For  this  reason  he  spoke  of  an  original 
and  a  derived  divinity.  He  considered  that  Christ,  even  during  the 
period  of  His  humiliation,  not  only  possessed  the  divine  attributes,  but 
that  He  also  used  them,  such  as  power,  omnipresence,  etc  ,  although 
secretly  and  under  concealment..  The  Schwabian  and  Wiirtembergian 
theologians  followed  this  tendency.  Because  of  the  prsesentio  intima 
of  the  human  nature  in  the  Logos  they  adopted  as  a  necessary  conse- 
quence a  prsesentia  extima,  although  it  was  merely  a  nuda  adessentia 
without  a  manifest  and  operative  activity  as  in  the  state  of  exaltation. 
This  view  introduces  a  duality  in  the  human  nature  of  Christ  and 
throws  a  Docetic  glimmer  on  the  humanity  of  Christ.  The  Saxon 
theologians  avoided  this  difficulty  by  distinguishing  between  posses- 
sion and  exercise.  Ciiem.mtz  taught  that  the  divine  attributes  per- 
meated the  human  nature  and  functioned  through  it  as  its  organ.  The 
human  nature  of  Christ  possessed  the  divine  attributes,  but  it  was  a 
retractatio,  a  withdrawal  of  the  effulgence  of  glory,  a  resting  or  a 
voluntary  renunciation.  Christ  used  the  divine  attributes  only  par- 
tially in  relation  to  His  human  nature.  The  question  of  omnipresence 
was  based  on  the  indissoluble  unity  between  the  Logos  and  the  human 
nature  (preesentia  intima).  In  accordance  with  His  human  nature 
Christ  could  be  present  wherever  He  willed  to  be  (multivolipraesens). 
The  Formula  of  Concord,  which  clearly  sets  forth  the  doctrine  of  unio 
personalis  and  its  consequences,  does  not  speak  decisively  on  the  ques- 
tion of  renunciation.  Undoubtedly  this  was  dependent  on  the  divergent 
views  of  Brentz  and  Chemnitz.  However,  the  development  of  the 
doctrine  takes  place  generally  along  the  lines  laid  down  in  the  position 
of  Chemnitz.  Kenosis  has  reference  to  the  human  nature  of  Christ. 
The  divine  nature  remains  in  possession  of  and  uses  the  divine  attri- " 
butes,  while  the  human  nature  possesses  them  without  using  them  to 
their  full  extent.  This  partial  abstention  in  the  use  of  them  consti- 
tutes the  renunciation  or  humiliation.  About  1619  there  arose  a  con- 
troversy in  the  Lutheran  Church  between  the  Giessen  and  the  Tiibingen 
schools    of    Theology.      TuuM.Mirs,    Lucas    Osiaxder    and    Nikolai    in 


248  ciiRiSTor.or.Y. 

Tiihi/Kjot  taught  that  the  possession  of  the  attributes  implied  the  use 
of  them.  When  they  spoke  of  praesentia,  they  declared  that  extima 
was  a  necessary  result  of  intima.  The  communication  of  the  attributes 
was  reciprocal.  The  humiliation  or  renunciation  of  Christ  consisted 
in  His  keeping  secret  the  exercise  of  the  attributes,  which  they  ex- 
pressed by  the  term  k/dui/'is  t^s  xpW^'^'^i  ^^^  which  reason  Christ  even 
during  the  period  of  His  humiliation  and  in  accordance  with  His 
human  nature  exercised  the  operative  attributes.  Even  in  the  manger 
in  accordance  with  His  human  nature  He  was  seated,  although  secretly, 
on  the  right  hand  of  God.  From  the  beginning  He  was  omnipresent 
and  all-powerful,  etc.  Later  on,  however,  they  acknowledged  that 
there  ensued  a  retractatio  or  withdrawal  of  the  exercise  of  His  divine 
power  during  the  period  of  suffering  under  the  High  Priest.  The  dif- 
ference between  the  states  of  humiliation  and  exaltation  was  in  the 
mode,  i.  e.,  the  one  was  hidden,  the  other  open.  The  Giessen  theo- 
logians Mf:i\tzku,  Fkuickhoun  and  Wixkelmaxx  denied  this  secret  exer- 
cise of  the  attributes  and  rejected  therefore  the  cryptic  theory.  They 
adopted  the  old  Kenotic  position  (kcVwo-is  t^s  x/^r/crews).  They  re- 
jected an  absolute  omnipresence  during  the  state  of  humiliation,  but 
the  divine  nature  was  omnipresent.  The  Logos  was  active  in,  but  not 
always  through  the  human  nature.  They  distinguished  between  the 
supernatural  and  illocal  presence  of  God  and  His  omnipraisentia  opera- 
tiva. This  latter  depended  on  the  will  of  God.  The  union  of  the  Logos 
was  a  priesentia  intima,  but  not  extima.  The  human  nature  possessed 
only  the  possibility  of  operative  omnipresence.  The  humiliation  con- 
sisted in  the  partial  renunciation  of  the  exercise  of  the  attributes 
which  depended  on  the  will  of  God.  But  that  which  was  a  real  potency 
during  the  period  of  renunciation  manifested  itself  in  complete  activity 
in  the  state  of  exaltation.  The  Decisio  Suxoni(,-a,  pronounced  by  the 
Saxon  theologians  in  1624,  was  in  the  main  favorable  to  the  Giessen 
theologians,  but  the  question  was  not  treated  with  the  necessary  pro- 
fundity, nor  was  it  finally  settled.  Calovus  and  Hollazh  .s  taught  that 
even  during  the  state  of  humiliation  there  was  a  realis  adessentia  ad 
creaturas,  but  distinct  from  the  present  operatio. 

The  controversy  that  waxed  so  warm  in  the  beginning  of  the  17th 
century  has  during  the  modern  critical  period  again  made  its  appear- 
ance in  a  new  form,  furnished  with  the  scientific  equipment  of  to-day. 
The  modern  Kenotic  development  goes  beyond  the  views  of  the  Giessen 
theologians  and  teaches  a  real  abandonment  of  the  divine  attributes. 
The  Kenotists  do  not  indeed  have  the  same  conceptions  concerning  the 
theory,  but  in  the  main  the  distinction  is  as  to  the  degree  of  renuncia- 
tion. Their  point  of  departure  is  the  assertion,  infinitum  capax  est 
finiti.  The  Kenotists  pull  down  the  infinite  to  the  finite.  The  humilia- 
tion is  a  question  of  the  renunciation  not  only  of  the  divine  glory,  but 
also  of  the  divine  mode  of  existence.     Among  the  Kenotists  we  name 


THE   TWO    STATES   OF   CHRIST.  249 

Thomasius  first.  He  advocated  a  more  profound  conception  of  Kenosis 
than  the  ordinary.  Humiliation  did  not  indeed  imply  a  renunciation 
of  any  essential  elements  in  the  divinity,  but  rather  a  renunciation  of 
the  divine  mode  of  existence  in  favor  of  the  human  form  of  existence 
and  eo  ipso  a  renunciation  of  the  divine  glory.  He  distinguishes  be- 
tween the  immanent  and  relative  attributes  of  God  and  says  that 
Christ  on  earth  both  possessed  and  exercised  the  former,  but  renounced 
both  the  possession  and  the  exercise  of  the  latter.  The  Kenotists  like 
Thomasius  contradict  themselves  in  saying  that  Christ  used  the  im- 
manent attributes.  But  how  could  He  use  eternity  in  the  proper  sense 
according  to  His  human  nature?  And  how  could  He  fully  abstain  from 
the  relative  attributes  according  to  both  natures  and  remain  divine? 
The  divine  attributes  of  the  Logos  are  not  conceived  of  as  made  of 
none  effect,  but  as  it  were  condensed  into  such  form  as  to  harmonize 
with  the  true  human  nature.  Gess  was  more  radical  in  his  conception. 
He  said  that  before  His  earthly  life  the  Son  was  God,  but  during  the 
earthly  life  He  was  a  man.  Jesus  was  not  conceived  of  as  having  a 
human  soul  besides  being  Logos,  but  Logos  had  become  a  human  soul. 
At  the  incarnation  the  Son  renounced  the  immanent  as  well  as  the 
relative  attributes,  i.  e.,  His  divine  being.  Liehxeu  considered  that 
the  divine  fulness  which  the  Father  from  eternity  had  imparted  to 
the  Son  returned  to  the  Father  at  the  incarnation  by  reason  of  the 
self-renunciation,  wherefore  in  the  beginning  this  fulness  was  outside 
the  Son,  but  afterwards  it  returned  as  a  gift  to  be  appropriated  by 
Christ  during  the  period  of  His  humiliation.  Lange  emphasized  in  his 
conception  of  Kenosis  not  so  much  the  renunciation  of  the  possession 
as  of  the  exercise  of  the  divine  attributes.  Some  of  the  Kenotists,  not 
to  say  the  majority,  consider  that  the  divine  attributes  were  present 
in  Christ  first  in  potential  or  undeveloped  form,  from  which  state 
they  gradually  developed.  Julius  Muller  points  out  that  Paul  presents 
the  contrast  between  the  earthly  life  of  Christ  and  His  ante-temporal 
existence  under  the  figure  of  poverty  and  wealth.  The  incarnation 
marked  ä  real  self-renunciation  not  only  of  the  exercise,  but  also  of 
the  possession  of  the  divine  attributes.  In  Christ  there  was  indeed 
a  real  union  of  a  divine  and  a  human  nature,  but  in  the  beginning  it 
was  merely  potential  and  hidden,  while  its  full  development  belongs 
to  the  state  of  exaltation.  Mautensen  taught  a  relative,  yet  real 
Kenosis.  He  speaks  of  the  revelation  of  the  Logos  and  the  revelation 
of  Christ.  Kenosis  belongs  to  the  latter.  The  divinity  was  clothed  in 
humanity.  The  external  infinity  of  the  divine  attributes  was  trans- 
formed into  an  internal  infinity  in  order  that  they  might  be  contained 
within  the  limits  of  human  nature.  In  the  measure  that  the  human 
nature  grew,  the  divine  nature  also  grew.  At  the  same  time  that 
Christ  realized  the  significance  of  His  historical  position,  He  became 
more  and  more  conscious  of  His  pre-existence  and  of  His  going  forth 


250  CIIKISTOLOCY. 

from  the  Father.  Dounkh  emphasized  the  opposition  between  the  two 
natures  to  such  an  extent  that  there  resulted  a  duality  of  related  per- 
sons, Logos  and  Jesus,  who,  during  the  earthly  life  of  the  latter,  gradu- 
ally grew  into  each  other.  The  incarnation  was  therefore  a  successive 
process.  In  the  beginning  the  activity  of  the  Logos  had  for  its  object 
the  foundation  of  a  divine-human  nature  (unio  naturarum)  as  a  basis 
for  the  personality  (unio  personalis).  There  was  a  continual  develop- 
ment and  a  successive  union.  As  the  generation  of  the  Son  is  eternal, 
so  the  incarnation  is  not  momentary,  but  continues  until  its  consum- 
mation in  the  state  of  exaltation,  being  complete  at  the  resurrection 
and  perfect  at  the  ascension.  Gkanfei.t  was  a  Kenotist.  He  says:  "If 
we  have  been  lifted  up  to  a  more  living  conception  of  the  self-renuncia- 
tion of  the  Logos  as  the  ground  of  the  incarnation,  then  it  will  be 
perfectly  clear  that  we  must  refer  the  humiliation  of  Christ  to  His 
divine  nature,  which  will  then  appear  evident  in  the  self-sacrificing 
love  with  which  the  Trinitarian  Son  renounced  His  external  divine 
glory  to  become  man.  On  the  other  hand,  we  refer  the  exaltation  of 
Christ  to  His  human  nature,  which  through  the  incarnation  passes 
successively  from  glory  to  glory  until  the  divine  nature  is  merely  a 
restitution."  Lxthardt  is  also  a  Kenotist,  and  considers  that  the 
modern  doctrine  of  Kenosis  makes  the  earthly  and  historical  existence 
of  the  God-man  more  real  and  comprehensible  through  a  more  profound 
conception  of  the  renunciation.  Piiii.ippi,  however,  and  many  others 
have  combatted  the  modern  theories  of  Kenotism  and  have  presented 
the  old  orthodox  doctrine  of  Kenosis. 


IV.     SOTERIOLOGY 


SOTERIOLOGY  is  that  part  of  Dogmatics  which  treats  of 
the  work  of  Christ  or  the  objective  work  of  salvation,  HoL- 
LAZius  defines  officium  Christi  mediatorium  as  follows:* 
"The  mediatorial  office  of  Christ  is  that  function  by  which 
Christ  performs  the  work  of  mediation  between  the  ag- 
grieved God  and  sinful  man,  in  that  through  His  blood  and 
His  death  He  sanctified  the  covenant  of  grace  between  the 
two,  which  He  has  ratified  by  declaring  and  offering  His 
Gospel  to  sinners,  while  He  confirms  and  preserves  that 
which  He  has  promised  through  His  all-powerful  dominion." 
His  office  is  therefore  threefold,  inasmuch  as  He  is  a 
prophet,  priest  and  king.  These  three  offices  offer  three 
different  viewpoints  from  which  to  consider  His  work  of 
salvation.  Being  distinct  in  the  Old  Testament,  the  three 
offices  are  united  in  Christ,  who  is  the  way,  the  truth,  and 
the  life.  In  such  case  the  way  signifies  His  priestly  oflfice, 
the  truth  His  prophetic  ofl^ce,  and  the  life  His  regal  office. 
Christ  was  all  in  all.  He  is  the  wisdom,  i.  e..  He  is  right- 
eousness, implying  that  which  is  fundamental,  or  the  priest- 
ly office ;  sanctification,  or  the  prophetic  office ;  and  redemp- 
tion, or  the  regal  oflice.  Cf.  1  Cor.  1 :  30,  Although  the 
high-priestly  office  occupies  the  central  position  among  the 
offices  of  Christ,  still  we  must  exercise  care  lest  we  empha- 
size the  one  office  to  the  detriment  of  the  others.  When  the 
•prophetic  office  is  over-emphasized  it  leads  to  Rationalism, 
when  the  priestly  office,  is  over-emphasized  it  leads  to  Mys- 
ticism, and  when  the  regal  office  is  over-emphasized  it  leads 
to  Chiliasm.  The  tripartite  distinction  between  the  offices 
of  Christ  was  introduced  into  Dogmatics  by  Calvin  and  has 

*  Exam.  Theol.  Acroam.     t'ars  III,  §1,  Cap.  iii,  p.  182. 


252  SOTERIOLOGY. 

been  used  in  the  Lutheran  Dogmatics  from  the  time  of 
Hafenreffer  and  Gerhard.  To  be  sure,  there  was  a  time 
when  objections  were  made  to  this  division  and  only  two 
offices,  the  sacerdotal  and  the  regal,  were  named,  but  the 
threefold  division  is  now  more  generally  used. 

§20.     THE  PROPHETIC  OFFICE  OF  CHRIST. 

QUENSTEDT  defines  officium  or  munus  propheticum  thus:* 
''The  prophetic  office  is  the  function  of  Christ,  the  God-man, 
bii  which  He,  in  accordance  with  the  purpose  of  the  holy 
Trinity,  fully  revealed  to  us  the  divine  will  concerning  the 
salvation  and  redemption  of  men,  ivith  the  earnest  intention 
that  the  ivhole  2vorld  should  come  to  the  knowledge  of  the 
heavenly  truth."  The  prophets  of  the  Old  Testament 
taught,  foretold  future  events,  and  performed  miracles  or 
did  wonderful  things.  Such  a  prophet  was  Moses.  In 
Deut.  18 :  15  we  read  that  Moses  said :  "Jehovah  thy  God 
will  raise  up  unto  thee  a  prophet  from  the  midst  of  thee, 
of  thy  brethren,  like  unto  me;  unto  him  shall  ye  hearken." 
Christ  was  the  promised  prophet.  No  one  taught  as  He, 
since  He  is  the  Son  of  God.  Both  He  Himself  and  His 
words  were  a  divine  revelation.  He  was  the  end  both  of 
the  Law  and  the  Prophets.  A  third  great  prophet  after 
Moses  and  Christ  cannot  appear.  "For  the  law  was  given 
through  Moses ;  grace  and  truth  came  through  Jesus  Christ" 
(John  1:  17).  But  Christ  was  in  the  highest  sense  the 
perfect  prophet  in  teaching,  prophecy  and  miracle.  He  also 
was  a  greater  mediator.  Cf.  Heb.  8:6:  'The  mediator  of 
a  better  covenant." 

The   following   attributes   are   ascribed   to   Christ   as   a 
prophet:  1)  the  greatest  prophet;  "A  great  prophet"  (Luke 
7:  16)  ;   2)  most  enlightened;  "For  he  whom  God  hath  sent' 
speaketh  the  words  of  God :  for  he  giveth  not  the  Spirit  by 

*  Qienstedt:  "Officium  propheticum  est  functio  Christi  de.av6pu)iTov, 
qua  is  sacrosanctse  trinitatis  concilio  divinam  de  redemtione  et  salute 
hominum  voluntatem  sufficientissime  nobis  revelavit,  ea  seria  inten- 
tione,  ut  in  universum  omnes  ad  agnitionem  veritatis  coelestis  per- 
veniant." 


THE   PROPHETIC   OFFICE  OF   CHRIST.  253 

measure"  (John  3:  34)  ;  "In  whom  are  all  the  treasures  of 
wisdom  and  knowledge  hidden"  (Col.  2:3);  3)  the  most 
authenticated;  "For  him  the  Father,  even  God,  hath  sealed" 
(John  6 :  27) .  Cf  Matt.  3  :  17 ;  John  12  :  28  and  other  pas- 
sages; 4)  the  most  poiverfid;  "A  prophet  in  deed  and  word" 
(Luke  24:  19)  ;  5)  the  most  universal;  "The  light  which 
lighteth  every  man"  (John  1:9),  etc. 

Christ  performed  and  still  performs  the  work  of  His 
prophetic  office  both  immediately  and  mediatehj.  In  the 
former  manner  He  labored  during  His  earthly  life.  He  is 
now  no  longer  present  in  a  visible  manner  and  therefore 
His  work  is  carried  on  immediately  only  through  His  Word 
in  the  Holy  Scriptures.  But  He  works  mediately  through 
His  servants,  so  that  the  office  of  the  ministry  is  the  con- 
tinuation of  His  prophetic  office.  We  read,  therefore,  con- 
cerning His  first  disciples :  "And  they  went  forth,  and 
preached  everywhere,  the  Lord  working  with  them"  (Mark 
16:  20).  Cf.  Matt.  28:  20;  "Neither  for  these  only  do  I 
pray,  but  for  them  also  that  believe  on  me  through  their 
word"  (John  17:  20)  ;  "Ye  shall  be  my  witnesses"  (Acts  1: 
8)  ;  "We  are  ambassadors  on  behalf  of  Christ"  (2  Cor.  5: 
20).  The  object  of  this  prophetic  activity  is  to  impart  to 
men  the  saving  knowledge  of  Christ. 

1.    Christ  as  Teacher. 

We  may  say  that  Christ  was  dedicated  to  His  prophetic 
office  as  a  teacher  at  His  baptism.  There  are  diverse  opin- 
ions concerning  the  length  of  His  public  ministry.  Some 
say  that  He  labored  in  this  office  for  three  years  or  more, 
while  others  seek  to  prove  that  it  lasted  only  one  year,  the 
gracious  and  acceptable  year  of  the  Lord. 

As  in  all  things,  Jesus  stood  alone  also  as  a  teacher. 
Others  cannot  be  compared  to  Him.  During  His  three  years 
as  a  teacher  He  did  more  than  all  other  teachers  in  all  time 
taken  together.  He  Himself  did  not  write  a  single  book, 
and  yet  what  He  said  and  did  was  of  such  vast  import  and 
content  that  John  cries  out,  saying:  "And  there  are  also 


254  SOIERIOLOGY. 

many  other  things  which  Jesus  did,  the  which  if  they  should 
be  written  every  one,  I  suppose  that  even  the  world  itself 
would  not  contain  the  books  that  should  be  written"  (John 
21 :  25) .  He  was  not  a  new  Moses,  i.  e.,  He  was  not  strictly 
a  lawgiver,  but  He  fulfilled  the  Law  and  explained  it  in 
such  a  manner  as  to  clearly  prove  Him  a  master  as  a 
teacher.  Besides,  whether  He  interpreted  the  Law  or 
preached  the  Gospel,  His  words  were  spirit  and  life,  prin- 
ciples that  created  a  new  world,  truths  that  no  human 
genius  could  have  thought. 

2.    The  Prophecies  of  Christ. 

Many  of  the  Old  Testament  prophecies  concerning  the 
Messiah  were  fulfilled  in  Christ,  while  the  others  are  being 
fulfilled  or  will  be  fulfilled  at  His  second  coming.  But  Christ 
Himself  gave  utterance  to  prophecies  that  threw  a  clear 
light  on  the  prophecies  of  the  old  prophets,  that  pictured 
briefly  the  history  of  the  Church  during  the  New  Testa- 
ment dispensation,  and  that  finally  set  forth  the  future  that 
shall  take  its  beginning  with  His  second  advent.  The 
eschatological  addresses  of  our  Lord  are  not  shrouded  in 
mystic  clouds  of  darkness,  but  are  clearly  and  plainly 
spoken.  We  feel  as  we  read  them  that  it  is  the  Son  of  God 
that  speaks.  Many  of  His  prophecies  have  already  been  ful- 
filled, such  as  that  of  the  destruction  of  Jerusalem,  the  ex- 
periences of  the  disciples  and  the  development  of  the  Church. 
The  Book  of  Revelation  contains  the  revelation  of  Jesus 
Christ.  In  that  book  we  hear  again  the  prophetic  voice  of 
Jesus.  He  sends  letters  also  to  the  churches,  in  which  we 
may  read  briefly  the  history  of  the  Church  in  all  the  world 
and  in  all  time.  The  prophecies  of  Jesus  Christ  prove  con- 
clusively that  in  the  foretelling  of  coming  events  He  was 
the  greatest  prophet. 

3.    Christ  as  a  Worker  of  Miracles. 

Christ  was  Himself  the  greatest  miracle.  For  this  reason 
He  performed  miracles  with  the  same  ease  that  we  per- 
form our  ordinary  duties.     The  Scriptures  make  mention 


THE    PROPHETIC   OFFICE    OF   CHRIST.  255 

of  only  some  of  His  miracles.  We  know  from  the  testimony 
of  the  evangelists  that  He  performed  more  than  are  related. 
About  thirty-five  miracles  are  described  with  greater  or 
less  detail.  Among  these  are  nine  nature  miracles,  twenty- 
three  miracles  of  healing,  while  in  three  the  dead  are  raised. 
At  the  same  time  that  the  miracles  bore  testimony  of  the 
divine  mission  of  Christ,  they  also  constituted  a  counter- 
action to  the  destructive  power  of  sin.  If  sin  had  not  en- 
tered into  the  world,  then  man,  created  in  the  image  of  God, 
would  have  had  dominion  over  the  earth,  while  internal  as 
well  as  external  harmony  would  have  prevailed.  Nature 
was  created  for  man,  and  not  man  for  creation.  Christ 
was  the  second  Adam  and  through  His  miracles  He  made 
manifest  the  normal  relationship  between  man  and  nature. 
The  God-man  set  forth  in  the  miracles  what  will  be  made 
manifest  in  the  restoration.  His  work  exerted  an  influence 
not  only  in  the  spiritual,  but  also  in  the  natural  world.  He 
was  the  Saviour  of  the  entire  man,  both  body  and  soul,  and 
Paul  tells  us  that  the  earnest  expectation  of  the  creation 
waiteth  for  the  revealing  of  the  sons  of  (iod  and  the  resti- 
tution of  Paradise  lost.  Christ  was  indeed  the  greatest 
miracle  worker  both  in  a  spiritual  and  an  earthly  sense. 
His  miracles  continue  in  the  kingdom  of  grace  and  exert 
their  influence  in  an  external  way,  since  the  influence  of 
Christianity  implies  the  working  of  many  miracles,  so  that 
in  that  way  also  the  prophetic  office  of  Christ  is  continued. 

4.    The  Object  of  the  Prophetic  Office  of  Christ. 

The  Son  of  God  performed  the  work  of  the  prophetic  office 
on  earth  and  afterwards  continues  the  same  through  the 
office  of  the  ministry,  hence  the  object  of  such  activity  must 
be  very  great.  This  object  is  twofold:  1)  finis  proximus 
or  the  impartation  of  the  knowledge  of  the  saving  truth,  so 
that  all  men  may  personally  be  made  partakers  of  the  con- 
tent of  the  truth,  as  we  read  in  Acts  26 :  18 :  "To  open  their 
eyes,  that  they  may  turn  from  darkness  to  light  and  from 
the  power  of  Satan  unto  God";  2)  finis  ultimus  or  the  glory 


25G  SOTKRIOLOGY. 

of  God  and  the  realization  of  His  divine  will  that  all  men 
should  be  saved.  In  1  Tim.  2 :  4  we  read :  "Who  would  have 
all  men  saved."    Cf.  2  Peter  3 :  9. 

§21.     THE  SACERDOTAL  OFFICE  OF  CHRIST. 

The  SACERDOTAL  OFFICE  OF  CHRIST  Or  MUNUS  SACERDOTALE 

is  the  ivork  of  Christ  th)ough  which  in  our  stead  He  satis- 
fies the  righteous  demands  of  God,  intercedes  for  us  as  our 
eternal  High  Priest  and  advocate  ivith  the  Father  and 
blesses  us. 

When  we  compare  the  office  of  the  High  Priest  in  the  Old 
Testament  as  a  type  with  Christ  as  an  antitype  we  find 
many  similarities,  but  we  also  discover  one  dissimilarity  of 
very  special  importance,  viz.,  that  Christ  was  both  the  High 
Priest  and  the  Sacrifice.  Christ  was  the  Lamb  that  was 
led  forth  to  the  slaughter,  but  also  the  officiating  Priest  in 
the  sense  that  He  voluntarily  offered  Himself.  Aaron  must 
needs  make  sacrifices  for  himself,  but  Christ  did  not  need 
to  do  this,  because  He  was  sinless.  The  priestly  office  of 
Christ  was  therefore  wholly  vicarious.  The  first  priestly 
service  of  Aaron  was  performed  at  the-  altar  situated  at  the 
entrance  to  the  tabernacle.  There  the  sacrifice  was  made. 
Then  Aaron  blessed  the  people  and  entered  into  the  sanc- 
tuary. Christ  also  did  the  same  after  His  sacrificial  suf- 
ferings when  He,  after  His  resurrection,  blessed  His  dis- 
ciples before  His  ascension  on  high  to  enter  the  Holy  of 
Holies.  Concerning  the  entrance  of  Christ  into  the  Holy 
of  Holies  the  author  of  the  letter  to  the  Hebrews  writes : 
"But  Christ  having  come  a  high  priest  of  the  good  things 
to  come,  through  the  greater  and  more  perfect  tabernacle, 
not  made  with  hands,  that  is  to  say,  not  of  this  creation, 
nor  yet  through  the  blood  of  goats  and  calves,  but  through 
his  own  blood,  entered  in  once  for  all  into  the  holy  place, 
having  obtained  eternal  redemption"  (Heb.  9:  11,  12). 
Our  High  Priest  is  there  now  and  intercedes  for  us.  But 
as  Aaron  came  forth  and  blessed  the  people,  so  Christ  shall 
come  again  and  bless  His  own  and  shall  punish  the  ungodly 


THE   SACERDOTAL  OFFICE  OF   CHRIST.  257 

with  fire.  Cf.  Lev.  9.  Concerning  the  type  of  the  great 
deed  of  Christ  and  His  suffering  on  the  great  day  of  atone- 
ment or  Good  Friday,  compare  Leviticus  16.  But  not  only 
Aaron  and  the  priests  of  the  Old  Testament,  or  the  priest- 
hood, are  types  of  Christ,  the  antitype;  Melchizedek,  who 
blessed  Abraham,  is  also  a  type.  Cf.  Heb.  6:  20 — 7:  4. 
And  yet,  although  the  blessing  is  a  part  of  the  functions  of 
the  high  priest,  still  the  sacrificial  suffering  or  the  atone- 
ment and  the  intercessory  prayer  occupy  the  chief  places. 
The  blessing  is  poured  out  upon  us  in  the  kingdom  of  grace 
and  will  be  imparted  to  the  Church  of  Christ  in  complete 
measure  when  Christ  shall  come  again.  We  shall  therefore 
deal  first  with  the  doctrine  of  atonement  and  afterwards 
with  the  high-priestly  intercessory  prayer  of  Christ. 

I.    The  Reconciliation  or  the  Atonement  in  the 

General  Sense. 

1.    the  necessity  of  the  atonement. 

There  are  some  who  have  considered  that  the  atonement 
would  not  be  necessary  in  case  God  were  the  object,  but 
such  a  view  fails  to  grasp  the  meaning  of  the  atonement, 
at  the  same  time  involving  a  misconception  of  the  nature 
of  God  and  man.  The  love  of  God  is  misinterpreted  at 
the  cost  of  His  holiness,  while  the  depth  of  human  sinful 
corruption  is  overlooked.  The  main  conception  in  every 
religion  is  reconciliation  or  atonement.  Man  himself  feels 
the  need  of  atonement.  On  this  account  all  religions  speak 
of  sacrifice,  and  the  Christian  religion  has  realized  what 
the  other  religions  have  sought  for.  Christianity  is  the 
religion  of  reconciliation  or  atonement.  The  special  revela- 
tion of  God  in  Christ  makes  clearly  manifest  the  necessity 
of  the  atonement.  Concerning  this  necessity  the  following 
points  may  be  considered : 

1)  Man  is  conscious  of  his  guilt  as  a  sinner  (both  in  har- 
boring and  doing  sin),  reatus  culpae,  and  of  his  liability  to 
punishment,  reatus  poenae.  The  fact  is  incontrovertible 
that  all  men,  to  a  greater  or  less  extent,  feel  that  they  are 
not  what  they  ought  to  be,  and  for  this  reason  fear  a  future 


258  SOTKKlOI.OtiY. 

retribution.  The  consciousness  of  guilt  remains,  although 
the  special  sin  that  has  been  committed  may  have  been  for- 
gotten. But  as  man  sins  day  by  day,  so  the  guilt  increases, 
and  even  if  he  does  not  always  consider,  but  rather  forgets, 
that  he  is  a  debtor,  still  he  cannot  always  turn  a  deaf  ear 
to  the  warning  voice  of  conscience.  2)  The  voice  of  con- 
science denotes  that  the  will  of  one  person  has  violated  the 
will  of  another,  which  in  this  case  can  be  no  other  than  the 
will  of  (iod,  whose  Law  man  has  transgressed.  Man  re- 
alizes in  every  sinful  act  that  he  has  not  only  transgressed, 
it  may  be,  some  human  law,  but  that  he  has  sinned  against 
a  higher  power,  or  God.  Even  the  heathen  are  conscious 
of  this  to  a  greater  or  less  extent.  Cf .  Rom.  2 :  15 :  "They 
show  the  work  of  the  law  written  in  their  hearts,  their 
conscience  bearing  witness  therewith,  and  their  thoughts 
one  with  another  accusing  or  else  excusing  them."  3)  Inas- 
much as  the  evil  conflicts  with  the  essence  of  God,  therefore 
He  reacts  against  it,  since  He  is  absolutely  holy.  Sin  arouses 
the  hatred  and  the  wrath  of  God,  and  because  the  sinner 
and  sin  cannot  in  reality  be  distinguished,  therefore  the 
sinner  becomes  the  object  of  the  wrath  of  God.  The  fol- 
lowing passages  may  be  quoted:  "Why  doth  thine  anger 
smoke  against  the  sheep  of  thy  pasture?"  (Ps.  74:  1)  ;  "The 
wrath  of  God  abideth  on  him"  (John  3:  36;  cf.  Rom.  2:5); 
"Children  of  wrath"  (Eph.  2:  3;  5:  6).  4)  Love  does  not 
prevent  such  a  reaction  as  this,  inasmuch  as  the  character 
of  love  in  the  divine  essence  is  such  that  He  loves  Himself 
as  the  Holy  One.  God's  love  cannot  be  separated  from  His 
holiness.  God  is  holy  love.  For  this  reason  we  cannot 
compare  the  love  of  God  with  the  indulgent  love  of  sinful 
men,  which  very  often  is  not  real  love,  but  the  opposite. 
God  is  perfect  in  His  love  and  just  as  perfect  in  His  holi- 
ness. The  one  attribute  cannot  abrogate  the  other.  5)  The 
reaction  of  God  against  sin  and  the  sinner  implies  punish- 
ment, which  denotes  exclusion  from  the  communion  with 
God,  or  death,  which  has  a  negative  side,  or  the  loss  of  life, 
and  a  positive  side,  or  damnation.  The  word  death  includes 
therefore  both  bodily  and  eternal   death.     6)    The  sinner 


THE  SACERDOTAL  OFFICE  OF  CHRIST.  259 

cannot  again  be  received  into  communion  with  God  if  the 
demands  of  God's  justice  are  not  satisfied.  Inasmuch  as 
God  is  unchangeable  not  only  in  His  love,  but  also  in  His 
righteousness,  therefore  He  cannot  act  arbitrarily.  The 
demands  of  the  LaM^  must  be  fulfilled,  since  otherwise  God 
would  not  be  the  absolutely  Holy  One.  There  can  be  no 
compromise,  for  if  there  be  any  diminution  of  the  holiness 
of  God,  which  is  made  manifest  in  His  punitive  justice, 
then  the  love  of  God  might  be  subject  to  diminution  at  the 
cost  of  some  other  attribute.  The  attributes  stand  in  the 
closest  relationship  to  each  other,  but  in  this  relationship 
each  attribute  is  unchangeable  as  to  its  nature  and  activity. 
7)  Man  cannot  satisfy  the  demands  of  God's  righteousness; 
hence  there  would  be  no  salvation,  if  God  had  not  in  His 
great  love  prepared  the  way  of  salvation.  This  inability 
of  man  is  clearly  presented  in  the  Word  of  God  and  is  con- 
firmed in  the  personal  experience  of  man.  The  love  of  God, 
revealed  in  the  sending  of  His  Son,  is  presented  in  many 
places,  as  in  John  3:  16;  Eom.  8:  3,  32;  1  John  4:  10,  etc. 
This  proves  the  evident  necessity  of  the  atonement.  8) 
The  sending  of  the  Son  was  the  only  way  in  which  God 
could  combine  His  love  and  righteousness  in  relation  to 
man.  If  God  had  not  been  absolutely  holy,  then  salvation 
could  have  been  accomplished  without  the  atoning  work  of 
Christ.  In  that  case  God  could  in  His  goodness  like  an 
indulgent  father  have  granted  to  men  the  privileges  that 
they  had  forfeited  through  sin.  But  the  love  of  God  was 
an  absolutely  holy  love,  and  for  this  reason  an  atonement 
became  necessary.  The  atonement  was  needed,  and  in  His 
goodness  God  willed  the  salvation,  of  men.  Inasmuch  as 
man  could  not  make  atonement,  God  sent  His  Son.  There 
was  no  other  way.  In  this  manner  both  the  love  of  (iod 
and  His  righteousness  as  justice  were  satisfied  in  relation 
to  man. 

2.      THE    SUBJECT    OF    THE    RECONCILIATION    OR    ATONEME_NT. 

The   subject   of   the   atonement   is    God.      It   m.ay   seem 
strange  that  God  is  both  the  subject  and  the  object,  but  in- 


260  SOTERIOLOGY. 

asmuch  as  man  could  not  make  satisfaction,  and  further- 
more, since  the  atonement  was  absolutely  necessary,  there- 
fore God  Himself  in  His  great  love  brought  about  the  work 
of  reconciliation  between  Himself  and  mankind.  Although 
the  sending  of  the  Son  is  specially  ascribed  to  the  Father, 
still  the  Son  was  willing  to  be  sent.  Opera  ceconomica  are 
indeed  minus  indivisa  in  comparison  with  opera  attribu- 
tiva,  which  are  indivisa,  but  all  opera  ad  extra  are  still  in 
a  sense  indivisa  or  communia.  Therefore  God  is  the  sub- 
ject as  a  Trinity,  although  the  Father  is  especially  named 
as  the  subject  when  we  consider  the  content  of  John  3 :  16, 
where  it  is  stated  that  God  as  the  Father  gave  His  only 
begotten  Son.  Compare  Rom.  8 :  32,  where  we  read :  "He 
that  spared  not  his  own  Son."  Compare  also  the  high- 
priestly  intercessory  prayer  of  Christ  in  John  17,  where  He 
prays  to  His  Father.  In  2  Cor.  5:  17,  19,  we  read  that 
God  reconciled. 

3.      THE   CONCEPT   OF   THE   RECONCILIATION    OR   ATONEMENT. 

Reconciliatio(  KaraAAayT;*,  Versöhnung,  försoning) ,  ivhich 
comprises  and  constitutes  the  result  of  satisfactio  and  ex- 
piatio,  denotes  the  objective  restoratioii  of  the  original 
relationship  bettveen  God  and  the  human  race  that  had  been 
disturbed  and  nullified  through  sin.  Atonement  means  the 
relationship  of  peace,  since  the  reaction  of  the  justice  of 
God  against  sin  or  the  wrath  of  God  has  been  appeased,  so 
that  it  is  possible  for  God  without  violating  His  justice  to 
be  gracious  toward  sinners.  For  this  reason  the  following 
assertion  is  true:**  Christ  has  reconciled  God  to  the  world 
and  the  world  has  through  Christ  been  reconciled  to  God. 
The  atonement  is  also  called  redemption  ( aTroAiV/awori? ) ,  but 

^'^KaraWay^  (reconciliation),  the  exchange  effected,  then  the  recon- 
ciliation. Agreeably  to  the  use  of  KaTdWdaaeiv,  it  denotes  the  result 
of  the  divine  act  of  salvation,  to  wit,  the  new  molding  of  the  relation 
in  which  the  world  stands  to  God  as  far  as  it  no  longer  remains  the 
object  of  this  wrath,  and  He  no  longer  stands  to  it  as  an  'uj/rt^os." 
Cremer's  Lexicon  (4th  Engl.  Ed.),  p.  93. 

**  Compare  Thomasius,  Christi  Person  und  Werk,  Dritte  Auflage, 
§57,  p.  79. 


THE   SACERDOTAL  OFFICE  OF  CHRIST.  261 

in  that  case  the  satisfaction  of  Christ  is  considered  more 
especially  in  relation  to  man,  as  to  how  he  was  redeemed 
from  the  power  of  sin  and  Satan  to  God.  The  two  elements 
that  enter  into  reconciliation  are  satisfactio  and  expiatio. 
These  terms  seem  indeed  to  express  the  same  thing,  so  that 
satisfactio  denotes  expiatio  and  vice  versa,  but  expiatio 
implies  more  than  satisfactio.  The  definition  of  reconcilia- 
tion would  not  be  complete  with  satisfactio.  The  two  terms 
complement  each  other,  rendering  the  conception  more 
perfect. 

1)  Satisfactio  (satisfaction,  Genugthuung,  tillf yllestgö- 
relse)  is  that  part  of  the  high-prientlij  work  of  salvaticn  of 
Jesus  Christ  through  ivhich  in  our  stead  He  fulfilled  the 
demands  of  the  divine  righteousness  by  means  of  His  active 
and  passive  obedience.  The  two  terms  that  are  employed 
to  characterize  satisfactio  are  therefore  the  following: 
a)  obedieyitia  actioa,  which  consisted  in  the  most  perfect 
fulfillment  of  the  Law  in  our  stead,  with  the  result  that 
those  who  believe  in  Christ  are  liberated  from  the  guilt  of 
sin;  b)  obedientia  passiva,  which  is  satisfactio  in  the  sense 
that  Christ  sufl^'ered  the  punishment  of  sin  in  our  stead,  so 
that  the  believers  are  liberated  from  the  punitive  sufl'ering 
on  account  of  sin.  His  satisfaction  or  vicarious  obedience 
was  suflficient  for  all,  but  application  by  faith  in  Him  was 
necessary.  Among  Scripture  passages  that  refer  to  the 
obedience  of  Christ  the  following  may  be  noted:  "For  as 
through  the  one  man's  disobedience  the  many  were  made 
sinners,  even  so  through  the  obedience  of  the  one  shall  the 
many  be  made  righteous"  (Rom.  5:  19)  ;  "One  died  for  all" 
(2  Cor.  5 :  14)  ;  "Who  his  own  self  bare  our  sins  in  his  body 
upon  the  tree"  (1  Peter  2:  24;  cf.  Isa.  53:  5)  ;  "Christ  also 
suffered  for  our  sins  once,  the  righteous  for  the  unright- 
eous" (1  Peter  3:  18).  The  whole  life  of  Christ  was  one 
of  active  and  passive  obedience,  although  His  suffering 
culminated  toward  the  end.  He  not  only  suffered  for  our 
sins,  that  we  might  be  liberated  from  punishment ;  through 
His  active  obedience  He  procured  a  righteousness  which 
He  Himself  did  not  need,  and  which  therefore  redounded 


262  SOTKKIOI.OCJY. 

to  the  benefit  of  mankind  in  the  determined  way.  This 
righteousness  was  the  fruit  of  His  active  and  passive  obe- 
dience. The  wages  of  sin  was  eternal  death.  The  death 
of  Christ  was  therefore  a  vicarious  death  as  a  punishment 
for  the  sin  of  man.  In  Heb.  2:  9  we  read:  "By  the  grace 
of  God  he  should  taste  of  death  for  every  man."  This 
could  not  have  been  done,  had  He  not  borne  the  sins  of  the 
M'orld.  It  is  not  necessary  to  cite  the  many  passages  which 
present  this  matter.  However,  compare  x'^P^^  a/xttprias  in 
Heb.  9 :  28  and  4 :  15.  From  this  it  is  plainly  evident  that 
He  Himself  was  sinless,  and  still  had  sin,  the  sin  of  others. 
Therefore  He  suffered  for  our  sins  and  was  obedient  unto 
death,  the  death  of  the  cross.  Jesus  Christ  was  made  to 
be  both  u/Aapna  and  Kardpa  for  us.  Compare  2  Cor.  5:  21; 
Gal.  3 :  13.  Being  sinless  Himself  He  could  satisfy  the 
divine  demands.  His  satisfaction  as  to  its  active  and  pas- 
sive obedience  possessed  valid  power,  so  that  He  was  our 
Xvrpov  or  kopher.  According  to  the  Hebrew  idiom  it  is 
he  that  pays,  or  he  for  whom  the  ransom  is  paid,  that  is 
covered  with  the  price.  Inasmuch  as  Christ  Himself  was 
sinless,  but  bore  our  guilt,  therefore  He  became  our  Re- 
deemer, and  inasmuch  as  He  was  covered  through  His  satis- 
faction, therefore  it  was  really  we  that  were  covered.  This 
means  that  God  considers  the  whole  transaction  objectively 
as  if  the  satisfaction  had  been  performed  by  man.  By  rea- 
son of  this  kopher  the  state  of  guilt  was  annulled  and  the 
punishment  inhibited.  Christ  blotted  out  the  bond  (Col. 
2:  14)  that  was  against  us,  which  implied  both  guilt  and 
punishment.  With  regard  to  the  two  terms  used  to  describe 
satisfactio,  they  must  not  be  separated,  since  they  stand  in 
the  closest  possible  relation  to  each  other,  so  that  the  obe- 
dientia  passiva  was  also  active  (obedientia  activa)  and  the 
obedientia  activa  was  also  passive   (obedientia  passiva). 

2)  EXPIATIO  (kippurim,  IXaafio';,  Siihnung,  atonement, 
expiation)  is  7wt  only  satisfaction  but  propitiation  and 
expresses  the  modus  of  the  atonement  as  the  voluntary  self- 
sacrifice  of  Christ  throughout  the  ivhole  of  His  life  as  an 
atoning  sacrifice,  implying  the   voluntary  suffering  of  the 


IHE   SACERDOTAL   OFFICE   OF   CHKIST.  263 

ivrath  of  God  by  reason  of  siyi,  causing  indescribable  and 
intensive  ajiguish  or  jjassion,  which  at  the  same  time  con- 
stituted the  greatest  deed.  As  will  be  observed,  the  ethical 
element  enters  here,  so  that  Christ  not  only  suffered  the 
punishment  of  sin  and  fulfilled  the  demands  of  the  Law, 
but  of  His  own  volition  He  performed  the  work  of  recon- 
ciliation with  the  right  spirit,  the  spirit  of  an  absolutely 
righteous  person,  who  offers  Himself  as  a  sacrifice  to  recon- 
cile the  sins  of  humanity.  For  this  reason  the  sacrifice  of* 
Christ  became  not  only  a  satisfaction,  but  also  a  satisfying 
atonement  and  an  atoning  satisfaction.  This  is  expressed 
in  the  Hebrew  kippurim,  which  comes  from  the  verb  kipper, 
to  cover.  That  which  is  covered  is  sin  and  therefore  also 
the  sinner.  In  this  manner  the  guilt  is  blotted  out  or  paid. 
The  atoning  sacrifice  of  Christ  explains  therefore  how  God 
can  be  both  SiKatos  and  Slkuimv,  so  that  He  is  able  without 
nullifying  His  righteousness  or  justice  to  love  and  save  the 
sinner  in  the  determined  way.  Some  one  has  said  that 
satisf actio  et  expiatio  vicaria  is  the  "eupr/zca"  of  the  great 
and  holy  love  of  God. 

The  sufferings  of  Christ  were  not  of  a- calamitous  nature, 
as  the  reason  for  this  suffering  was  not  secret,  neither  were 
they  disciplinary,  as  He  had  done  no  wrong.  His  sufferings 
were  vicariously  retributive.  If  He  also  suffered  as  a  mar- 
tyr, that  was  not  the  real  reason  why  He  suffered  and  died. 
His  suffering  was  a  punishment  for  our  sins.  He  suffered 
both  physically  and  mentally.  The  physical  pain  He  en- 
dured was  extraordinary,  but  His  mental  suffering  in  the 
soul  is  inexplicable,  having  no  parallel  in  human  conscious- 
ness. 

When  Christ  as  the  atoning  sacrifice  suffered  the  punish- 
ment of  sin.  He  endured  in  His  soul  the  anguish  of  hell, 
which  the  Dogmaticians  express  in  Latin  terms  as  follows : 
poense  infernales,  poenae  damnatorum,  mors  seterna  cum 
doloribus,  angoribus  et  cruciatibus  infernalibus.  This  He 
suffered  in  the  Garden  of  Gethsemane  and  especially  on 
the  cross,  where  His  sufferings  reached  their  culmination 
in  the  derelictio.    This  suffering  is  not  to  be  considered  ex- 


264  SOTERIOLOGY. 

tensive  as  to  time,  but  intensive.  Christ  bore  in  death  the 
punishment  which  our  sins  had  deserved,  so  that  He  suf- 
fered the  eternal  punishment  in  our  stead.  He  suffered  the 
eternal  punishment-  in  an  eternally  intensive  way.  The 
derelictio,  or  the  consciousness  of  being  forsaken  by  God, 
expresses  the  culmination  as  well  as  the  nature  of  the  eter- 
nal suffering.  The  strong  crying  of  Jesus  as  being  forsaken 
by  God  was  not  a  sentimental  outcry  by  reason  of  great 
•  bodily  pain  or  soul  anguish ;  it  was  caused  by  the  realizing 
sense  of  being  actually  forsaken,  although  not  in  the  abso- 
lute sense.  The  dereliction  went  as  far  as  it  was  possible 
without  really  severing  the  ties  that  bound  the  Father  and 
Son  together.  The  Son  experienced  the  judgment  on  sin  in 
all  its  terrible  reality.  Philippi*  endeavors  to  explain  the 
suffering  as  intensive  in  such  manner  that  men  sinned 
against  an  infinite  God  and  were  therefore  in  accordance 
with  the  retributive  justice  of  God  adjudged  guilty  of  an 
intensive  and  infinite  punishment.  But  as  finite  creatures 
they  could  not  endure  such  a  punishment,  and  its  infliction 
would  have  annihilated  them.  For  this  reason  (>od  changed 
the  intensive  and  infinite  punishment  to  an  extensive  and 
infinite.  But  Christ  as  divine  was  capable  of  suffering  the 
originally  decreed  intensive  punishment,  for  which  reason 
He  did  not  need  to  suffer  extensively  as  to  time.  Björling** 
criticised  partly  the  explanation  of  Philippi  in  the  following 
way:  "This  view  overlooks  the  fact  that  the  spirit  of  man, 
while  created  and  individual,  and  in  this  sense  finite,  is 
nevertheless  a  partaker  of  the  infinity  of  God.  because  he 
is  created  in  the  image  of  God.  Sin  is  in  itself  intensively 
infinite  and  the  punishment  of  sin  has  therefore  also  the 
same  property.  Nothing  can  be  taken  from  this  intensive 
infinity  of  the  punishment  to  be  replaced  by  an  extensive 
infinity,  and  since  Christ  in  love  to  us  took  upon  Himself 
in  our  stead  the  guilt  and  punishment  of  sin  in  order  to 
satisfy  the  holiness  and  justice  of  God,  He  took  this  UDon 
Himself  in  the  same  manner  as  it  must  be  experienced  bv 

*  Glaubenslehre,  2  Aufl.,  IV,  2,  pp.  30—33. 
**  Björlings  dogmatik,  second  part,  third  div.,  p.  178. 


THE   SACERDOTAL  OFFICE  OF   CHRIST.  265 

sinful  men,  both  in  an  intensive  and  extensive  way."  But 
the  solution  is  to  be  found  in  the  fact  that  the  question  con- 
cerns states  or  conditions  that  partake  of  eternity,  and 
mathematical  calculations  are  not  necessary.  The  infinite 
worth  of  the  person  of  Jesus,  eternal  in  His  essence,  implies 
a  character  who  made  perfect  satisfaction.  The  fall  into 
sin  and  our  disobedience  are  in  reality  finite,  but  infinite  in 
guilt,  because  the  transgression  is  committed  against  an 
infinite  absolute  personality.  The  active  and  the  passive 
obedience  of  Christ  together  with  His  death  were  momen- 
tary as  to  time  or  finitse,  but  as  to  merit  they  are  infinitse. 
The  Socinians  claim  that  Christ  could  not  suffer  the  eter- 
nal punishments,  nor  was  it  necessary,  as  God  did  not  re- 
quire a  vicarious  atonement.  They  evidently  had  a  wrong 
conception  of  eternity  as  it  would  affect  the  God-man,  for 
they  denied  His  real  divinity  and  only  ascribed  to  Him  a 
titular  divinity.  According  to  the  Socinian  view  Christ 
only  suffered  as  a  martyr.  There  are  others  who  hold  that 
Christ  should  have  suffered  as  the  damned,  extensively,  and 
since  this  was  not  the  case,  they  claim  that  He  did  not  suffer 
eternal  punishments.  These  persons  think  that  God  is 
reconciled  by  the  endless  punishments.  The  condemned 
cannot  reconcile  God's  justice  by  their  punishments.  They 
rejected  the  vicarious  atonement  of  Christ  and  are  in  a 
condition  where  conversion  is  not  possible.  Only  Christ 
was  able  to  reconcile  (iod.  His  intensive  and  complete 
satisfaction  and  expiation  or  propitiation  satisfied  the  de- 
mands of  the  holiness,  righteousness  and  justice  of  God. 
We  should  not  speculate  in  regard  to  the  mode  as  to  how 
Christ  experienced  hell's  torments,  but  be  assured  from  the 
Scriptures  that  He  fulfilled  the  Law  in  our  stead  and  that 
He  suffered  fully  what  was  required  to  appease  the  justice 
and  wrath  of  God.  If  the  sufferings  were  not  identical, 
they  were  equivalent  and  of  greater  value  intrinsically.  If 
a  person  receives  a  loan  in  ragged  paper  money  and  pays  it 
back  in  shining  gold,  it  is  at  least  fully  equivalent.  When 
Christ,  who  could  experience  a  timeless  existence,  offered 
Himself  as  a  ransom  and  suffered  intensely,  we  should  not 


266  SOTKKIOLOOV. 

discuss  identical  modes  of  punishment.  When  God  was 
satisfied,  we  should  not  make  mathematical  calculations. 
What  Christ  did  can  never  be  estimated. 

We  would  call  attention  to  the  following  Scripture  pas- 
sages :  "Take  thy  censer,  and  put  fire  therein  from  off  the 
altar,  and  lay  incense  thereon,  and  carry  it  quickly  unto  the 
congregation,  and  make  atonement  for  them"  (Numbers 
16:  46).  The  means  of  atonement  steps  between  the  wrath 
of  God  and  the  people.  Compare  Lev.  16  concerning  the 
atonement  on  the  great  day  of  atonement.  "The  life  of  the 
flesh  is  in  the  blood ;  and  I  have  given  it  to  you  upon  the 
altar  to  make  atonement  for  your  souls :  for  it  is  the  blood 
that  maketh  atonement  by  reason  of  the  life"  (Lev.  17  :  11) . 
In  like  manner  Christ  was  offered  on  the  altar  of  the  cross, 
and  His  blood  became  an  atonement.  Christ  became  the 
perfect  antitype  of  the  principal  sacrifices :  the  sin-offering 
implied  expiatio,  the  trespass-offering  indemnificatio,  the 
burnt-offering  oblatio,  the  peace-offering  conciliatio.  The 
same  holds  with  regard  to  the  offering  of  the  covenant  in 
Ex.  24,  the  offering  of  consecration  in  Lev.  8,  and  the  offer- 
ing of  the  Passover,  since  Christ  is  our  Passover  (1  Cor. 
5:7).  He  suffered  in  silence  and  willingly.  Cf.  Isa.  53. 
Christ  foretold  His  own  suffering  and  did  not  spare  Him- 
self, as  He  could  have  done.  In  Phil.  2 :  8  we  read  that  He 
was  "obedient  even  unto  death,  yea,  the  death  of  the  cross." 
Expiatio  or  IXao-fj-o-;  is  used  for  atonement  in  1  John  2:2: 
"He  is  the  propitiation  for  our  sins."  Compare  also  Heb. 
5 :  7,  8,  which  speaks  of  His  suffering  and  obedience,  im- 
plying as  a  prerequisite  a  voluntary  sacrifice  of  Himself. 
"Christ  suffered  for  sins  once"  (1  Peter  3:  18).  That  the 
one  sacrifice  was  sufficient,  so  that  Christ  did  not  need  to 
suffer  extensively  as  to  time,  is  evident  in  the  light  of  Heb. 
9:  25,  26:  "Nor  yet  that  he  should  offer  himself  often,  as 
the  high  priest  entereth  into  the  holy  place  year  by  year 
with  blood  not  his  own;  else  must  he  often  have  suffered 
since  the  foundation  of  the  world :  but  now  once  at  the  end 
of  the  ages  hath  he  been  manifested  to  put  away  sin  by  the 
sacrifice  of  himself." 


THE   SACEIiDOTAL   OFFICE   OF   CIIKIST.  267 

4.     THE  ATTRIBUTES  OF  THE  RECONCILIATION  OR  ATONEMENT. 

We  ascribe  to  satisfaction -and  the  atonement  or  expia- 
tion the  following  attributes:  1)  vicaria  or  vicarious.  If 
it  be  formally  regarded  there  is  required:  a)  a  surrogation 
by  which  some  one  else  is  substituted  for  a  debtor,  with  the 
understanding  that  the  debt  is  charged  to  the  surrogate  or 
substitute;  b)  a  payment  of  the  debt  or  penalties.  The 
Socinians  objected  to  the  vicarious  atonement  and  stated 
that  the  act  of  one  man  cannot  be  the  a*ct  of  another.  But 
an  act  may  be  considered  from  a  physical  and  a  moral 
standpoint.  From  the  latter  point  of  view  an  imputation 
may  take  place.  The  question  must  not  be  considered  from 
the  mathematical  standpoint,  but  in  a  dynamic  way.  The 
idea  of  substitution  is  not  a  foreign  one  in  the  conditions 
of  human  life.  A  father,  a  mother,  and  others,  often  act 
vicariously.  The  one  person  often  does  that  which  another 
ought  to  do.  The  opponents  of  the  doctrine  of  satisfactio 
et  expiatio  vicaria  argue  that  if  Christ  has  died  in  the  stead 
of  all,  then  no  one  should  be  damned  by  God,  or  if  Christ 
has  paid  the  debt,  then  God  cannot  enforce  repayment.  But 
this  objection  embodies  a  misinterpretation  of  the  condi- 
tions that  obtain  iij  the  moral  world  and  in  the  realm  of 
freedom.  While  an  objective  atonement  has  been  accom- 
plished, still  God  cannot  arbitrarily  force  anyone  to  become 
^subjectively  reconciled  to  Him.  The  debt  is  not  a  monetary 
one,  although  the  terms  used  are  mercenary.  Furthermore, 
with  regard  to  the  objection  that  no  one  ought  to  die,  since 
Christ  has  died  for  us  all,  real  death  is  not  the  bod-ily  death, 
but  the  spiritual  and  the  eternal  death.  The  believers  them- 
selves, who  have  been  reconciled  in  the  subjective  sense, 
are  subject  to  bodily  death,  provided  Christ  does  not  in  the 
meantime  return,  when  the  Christians  will  not  be  unclothed, 
but  clothed  upon,  that  what  is  mortal  may  be  swallowed 
up  of  life  (2  Cor.  5:4).  But  those  who  will  not  obey  tha 
laws  in  the  moral  world  must  suffer  eternal  death,  in  spite 
of  the  vicarious  death  of  Christ,  because  they  have  not  ful- 
filled the  conditions  of  subjective  salvation.     Under  such 


268  SOTERIOLOGY. 

conditions  God  deals  with  perfect  justice,  inasmuch  as  such 
persons  have  rejected  the  reconcihation  of  Christ  and  have 
themselves  chosen  death.  Furthermore,  the  objection  has 
been  raised  that  God  could  not  impute  our  debts  to  Christ, 
who  was  guiltless.  But  Christ  voluntarily  assumed  the 
guilt  of  our  sin.  The  Scriptures  declare  most  plainly  that 
the  death  of  Christ  was  vicarious.  In  Matt.  20 :  28  we  read 
that  "the  Son  of  man  came  to  minister,  and  to  give  his  life 
a  ransom  for  many  {Xvrpov  åvrl  ttoAAwi')."  The  expression 
reads  therefore,  ransom  instead  of  many.  Cf.  1  Tim,  2:6: 
"Ransom  for  all  (åvrlXvrpov  v-n-ep  TTtti/Twv)."  The  idea  of  sub- 
stitution is  also  seen  in  the  translation  of  the  Hebrew 
kopher  by  Xvrpov  in  the  Septuagint.  Therefore  the  Lord 
gave  His  life  in  the  stead  of  the  many.  Cf.  John  6:  51; 
10:  11.  'Yirlp  does  not  nullify  the  meaning  of  åvri,  rather 
it  strengthens  it  and  complements  the  sense,  so  that  while 
it  was  done  "instead  of,"  it  also  was  done  "in  favor  of." 
Doctrines  are  fortified  and  explained  through  the  analogy 
of  faith.  In  2  Cor.  5:  19  we  read:  "Not  reckoning  unto 
them  their  trespasses,"  having  imputed  them  to  Christ,  in 
accordance  with  verse  21,  "Him  who  knew  no  sin  he  made 
to  be  sin  on  our  behalf."  Could  the  substitution  be  more 
clearly  expressed?  Compare  Gal.  3:  13;  Eph.  1:7;  Col. 
2 :  14.  In  1  Peter  2 :  24  we  read :  "Who  his  own  self  bare 
our  sins  in  his  body  upon  the  tree."  The  expression  åvyveyKtv 
corresponds  to  the  same  verb  used  in  the  translation  of  Isa. 
53  in  the  Septuagint.  Cf.  Heb.  9:  28.  We  ought  also  to 
remember  that  Christ  is  the  head  of  the  race,  that  He  is  the 
second  Adam,  the  Son  of  man,  and  therefore  by  reason  of 
His  organic  relationship  with  humanity  He  can  act  in  the 
stead  of  men.  Compare  Rom.  5:  12 — 19;  3:  25  ( iAao-r»/pioiO . 
The  Greek  word  corresponds  to  the  Hebrew  (transliterated 
into  English)  kapporeth,  from  kaphar,  to  cover.  We  will 
quote  the  following  passages:  "Whom  God  set  forth  to 
be  a  propitiation,  through  faith,  in  his  blood,  to  show  his 
righteousness  because  of  the  passing  over  of  the  sins  done 
aforetime,  in  the  forbearance  of  God"  (Rom.  3:  25)  ;  "Hav- 
ing a  golden  altar  of  incense,  and  the  ark  of  the  covenant 


THE   SACERDOTAL  OFFICE  OF   CHRIST.  269 

overlaid  round  about  with  gold,  wherein  was.  .  .the  tables 
of  the  covenant,  and  above  it  the  cherubim  of  glory  over- 
shadowing the  mercy  seat"  (Heb.  9:  4,  5).  Notice  propitia- 
tion and  mercy  seat!  The  kapporeth  became  the  propitia- 
tion and  mercy  seat  covering  the  tablets  of  the  Law  as  the 
Law  accuses  the  sinner.  The  blood  of  the  atonement  was 
sprinkled  upon  the  kapporeth  which,  therefore,  was  called 
the  mercy  seat.  The  sins  of  which  the  sinner  was  accused 
were  covered  by  the  blood  in  order  that  God  should  not  see 
the  sins  and  the  sinner.  This  means  that  God  was  pro- 
pitiated or  reconciled.  2)  Unirersalis,  i.  e.,  that  it  w^as  an 
atonement  for  all.  This  term  is  used  against  the  Calvinists, 
who  teach  that  Christ  died  only  for  the  elect.  3)  Sufficien- 
tissima  et  consummatissima,  because  the  atonement  was  in 
the  complete  sense  of  the  word  sufficient  and  perfect. 

5.      THE  OBJECT  OF  THE  RECONCILIATION. 

The  object  of  the  reconciliation  may  be  presented  from 
three  points  of  view:  a)  objectum  proprium  is  God,  the 
Triune,  but  by  reason  of  opera  oeconomica  in  the  doctrine 
of  the  Trinity,  the  objectum  proprium  is  especially  the 
Father;  b)  objectum  personale  is  humanity  or  the  world; 
c)  objectuvi  reale  is  sin,  both  peccatum  originate  and  pec- 
cata  actualia.  However,  the  last  two  conceptions  include 
the  first,  so  that,  strictly  speaking,  God  is  the  object  of  the 
objective  reconciliation. 

There  have  been  and  still  are  Socinian  tendencies  that 
deny  that  God  is  the  object  of  the  reconciliation.  Among 
other  reasons  advanced  in  defense  of  the  Socinian  position, 
it  is  stated  that  nowhere  in  Scripture  is  it  said  that  God  is 
reconciled.  Of  course  they  say  that  God  is  love  and  did  not 
need  to  be  reconciled.  Either  they  ignore  the  justice  of 
God  or  else  they  confuse  His  justice  with  His  love.  But 
even  if  the  expression  is  not  found  in  the  Bible,  still  the 
substance  is  there.  The  word  justice  cannot  be  translated 
by  love  or  any  of  its  synonyms.  In  this  connection  we  would 
call  attention  to  the  content  of  Heb,  2 :  17,  where  we  read 
LVao-Kco-öat  Tas  a/xaprtas.     In  the  classical   Greek  the  verb  is 


270  SOTKIMOI.OOY. 

used  only  with  the  gods  as  an  object,  but  is  not  so  used 
either  in  the  Septuagint  or  the  New  Testament.  The  reason 
is  evident  when  we  consider  the  meaning  of  the  correspond- 
ing Hebrew  word  kipper,  which  means  tegere  or  abstergere, 
since  it  cannot  properly  be  said  that  God  is  covered,  but 
that  the  atonement  covers  the  sinner  before  God.  But  if 
the  atoning  sacrifice  intervenes  between  the  wrath  of  God 
and  the  sinner,  so  that  the  sinner  is  covered,  then  in  reality 
it  is  equivalent  to  the  reconciliation  of  God.  Since  Christ 
has  become  the  propitiation  for  our  sins,  therefore  a  sinner 
may  cry  out  in  supplication:  "(iod,  be  thou  merciful  to  me, 
a  sinner!"  Christ  is  also  called  our  Advocate  with  the 
Father.  The  sacrifices  in  the  Old  Testament  were  offered 
before  the  Lord  as  a  sweet  savor.  Cf.  Lev.  1:  9.  Also  cf. 
Eph.  5:2:  "Christ  also  loved  you,  and  gave  himself  up  for 
us,  an  offering  and  a  sacrifice  to  God  for  an  odor  of  a  sweet 
smell."  Also  Heb.  8 :  12 :  "I  will  be  merciful  to  their  iniqui- 
ties." In  comparing  such  passages  as  those  quoted  with 
Rom.  5:  9,  10;  2  Cor.  5:  18,  19,  etc.,  it  becomes  clearly 
evident  to  every  conscientious  reader  of  the  Bible  that  God 
is  the  object  of  the  atonement,  and  not  only  the  world  or 
the  sins  of  men. 

The  Socinians  and  other  advocates  of  the  Moral  Theory 
claim  that  there  was  no  need  of  propitiating  God,  as  He 
loved  mankind  and  was  desirous  of  convincing  every  human 
being  of  this  fact,  and  that  no  atonement  was  necessary. 
According  to  them  Christ  was  only  a  man.  Our  doctrine  of 
the  atonement  rests  upon  the  fact  that  Christ  was  both 
human  and  divine.  If  Christ  had  been  a  sinless  man  only, 
God,  being  just,  would  not  have  punished  the  innocent  in- 
stead of  the  guilty,  and  if  He  had  done  so,  no  redemption 
would  have  resulted.  No  human  could  have  removed  the 
guilt  of  the  world.  If  a  creature  had  suffered  for  the  sins 
of  the  world  in  an  atoning  sense,  God  would  not  have  made 
any  sacrifice,  but  we  remember  the  statement  in  Rom.  8 : 
32,  "He  that  spared  not  his  own  Son,  but  delivered  him  up 
for  us  all,"  which  proves  the  great  sacrifice  of  God.  Some 
imagine  that  God  has  no  feeling,  because  emotions  would 


THE   SACERDOTAI.  OFFICE   OF   CHRIST.  271 

interfere  with  His  blessedness.  His  love,  justice  and  other 
attributes  prove  that  He  has  feelings,  but  His  intrinsic 
blessedness  •  is  not  disturbed  by  the  various  emotions.  Vi- 
carious atonement  is  supreme  proof  of  the  most  intense 
love  and  justice.  The  offended  God  sends  His  own  Son  to 
be  incarnated  to  atone  for  the  sins  of  the  world.  God  does 
not  only  demand  atonement,  but  offers  the  atonement  Him- 
self. "Herein  is  love,  not  that  we  loved  God,  but  that  he 
loved  us,  and  sent  his  Son  to  be  the  propitiation  for  our 
sins."  This  proves  the  absolute  requirement  of  reconciling 
God.  It  is  evident  that  atonement  was  necessary  and  that 
God  was  the  object  of  propitfation. 

6.      THE    EFFECTS    OF    THE    RECONCILIATION    OR    ATONEMENT. 

Briefly  stated,  it  may  be  said  that  the  effectus  of  the 
reconciliation  is  the  merit  of  Christ  with  all  that  is  implied 
therein,  which  He  has  gained  for  our  benefit,  inasmuch  as 
He  did  not  need  it  for  His  own  sake.  In  Eph.  1 :  7  we  there- 
fore read:  "In  whom  we  have  our  redemption  through  his 
blood,  the  forgiveness  of  our  trespasses,  according  to  tho 
riches  of  his  grace."  In  an  objective  sense  the  debt  has 
been  paid,  and  redemption  as  a  reconciliation  has  been  com- 
pleted. In  this  sense  we  have  been  redeemed  from  sin, 
death  and  the  devil.  This  Christ  has  done  and  can  there- 
fore bestow  His  merit  which  has  been  secured  for  all  men. 
Cf.  Rom.  5 :  8 — 18.  We  may  also  say  that  in  principle  the 
power  of  sin  has  been  broken.  Cf.  Rom.  7:4:  "Ye  were 
made  dead  to  the  law  through  the  body  of  Christ" ;  Titus 
2 :  14 :  "Who  gave  himself  for  us,  that  he  might  redeem  us 
from  all  iniquity,  and  purify  unto  himself  a  people  for  his 
own  possession."  In  principle  death  is  also  conquered.  Cf. 
Heb.  2 :  15 :  "And  might  deliver  all  them  who  through  fear 
of  death  were  all  their  lifetime  subject  to  bondage."  In  the 
same  sense  He  also  overcame  the  devil.  Cf.  Heb.  2 :  14,  etc. 
But  the  great  significance  of  the  merit  of  Christ  shall  ap- 
pear more  clearly  when  redemption  in  a  practical  sense  is 
completed.  The  Lamb,  who  purchased  unto  God  with  His 
blood  men  of  every  tribe,  and  tongue,  and  people  and  nation. 


272  SOTERIOLOGV. 

shall  alone  be  worthy  to  open  the  book  with  the  seven  seals. 
Cf.  Rev.  5. 

The  great  vicarious  work  of  Christ  was  finished  on  Cal- 
vary, when  He  cried :  "It  is  finished,"  John  19 :  30.  The 
objective  reconciliation,  including  satisfaction  and  atone- 
ment, was  then  completed.  But  the  same  Christ  will  also 
be  the  Redeemer  in  the  practical  sense,  and  the  word  will 
go  forth:  It  is  done!  Compare  Rev.  16:  17.  The  transac- 
tions leading  up  to  this  event  are  depicted  in  the  seven  seals, 
the  seven  trumpets  and  the  seven  bowls.  In  Rev.  5  the 
Saviour  is  called  the  Lamb  on  account  of  His  work  on 
Calvary  and  He  is  called  the 'Lion  in  reference  to  His  final 
redemptive  work  at  the  Second  Advent.  The  book  with 
seven  seals  and  the  events  connected  in  the  symbolism  trans- 
fer us  to  the  life  of  the  Old  Testament,  when  properties 
were  lost  and  mortgage  deeds  were  given  in  the  form  of 
book-rolls.  One  of  these  books  or  mortgages  (as  there  were 
two  copies)  was  closed  by  seals  and  contained  specifications 
and  conditions  of  redemption.  Opening  the  seals  was  a 
symbol  of  buying  back.  A  relative  who  would  buy  back  or 
redeem  such  a  mortgage  roll  was  called  Goel  or  redeemer.* 
When  we  transfer  the  figurative  language  in  this  case,  the 
lost  property  is  Paradise  and  Christ  is  the  G.oel  or  l^.e- 
deemer  who  can  change  Paradise  lost  to  Paradise  regained. 
The  opening  of  the  seals  means  many  conflicts  and  troubles 
to  dispossess  the  princes  of  the  evil  world  and  the  Prince 
of  darkness,  who  have  taken  unlawful  possession  of  the 
property  of  God  and  His  people.  Besides,  there  is  a  con-, 
stant  appeal  to  individuals  to  take  interest  in  the  kingdom 
of  God.  The  objective  reconciliation  has  as  its  aim  the 
subjective.  In  2  Cor.  5:  20  we  read:  "We  beseech  you  on 
behalf  of  Christ,  be  ye  reconciled  to  God."  In  (Jod's  own 
time  the  final  redemption  will  be  realized.  Rev.  10  describes 
one  of  the  grand  scenes  in  taking  final  possession.  And  in 
the  seventh  verse  we  read:  "In  the  days  of  the  voice  of  the 
seventh  angel,  when  he  is  about  to  sound,  then  is  finished 
the  mystery  of  God." 
*  Compare  Seiss,  The  Apocalypse,  Chap.  5,  Lecture  10. 


THE   SACERDOTAL  OFFICE  OF  CHRIST.  273 

II.  Concerning  the  High-priestly  Intercessory  Prayer 

OF  Christ. 

HoLLAZius  defines  intercession  as  follows:*  "Interces- 
sion is  the  second  act  in  the  sacerdotal  office  of  Christ, 
thi'oiigh  which  Christ  the  God-man,  on  the  ground  of  His 
infinite  merit,  really  and  jwopey^ly  intercedes  for  all  men 
and  especially  for  His  elect,  ivithoiit  in  the  least  diminishing 
His  majesty,  to  the  end  that  He  might  obtain  for  them 
ivhatsoever  things  He  knoivs  to  he  salutary  for  them  in  a 
temporal  and  especially  in  a  spiritual  sense." 

The  nature  of  intercession  is  more  particularly  defined 
by  the  following  negative  and  positive  terms:  a)  negative: 
1)  non  nuda  interpretativa,  as  though  Christ  interceded  for 
us  not  by  real  prayers,  but  by  His  merit  alone;  2)  non 
o-apKtKws  sen  SouAiKws,  so  that  He  as  a  suppliant  upon  His 
knees  and  with  outstretched  hands  should  make  a  vocal 
outcry  for  mercy,  inasmuch  as  this  would  conflict  with  His 
exalted  and  glorified  state ;  b)  positive:  1)  realis,  inasmuch 
as  He  really  prays  for  us;  2)  vocalis,  since  He  intercedes 
audibly  or  with  words;  3)  öeoirptwC)^ ,  or  in  a  manner  befitting 
the  Son  of  God;  4)  specialis,  since  He  prays  especially  for 
the  elect;  5)  generalis,  since  He  prays  for  all  that  still  are 
in  the  kingdom  of  Grace. 

The  following  passages  may  be  observed :  "It  is  Jesus 
Christ  that  died,  yea  rather,  that  was  raised  from  the  dead, 
who  is  at  the  right  hand  of  God,  who  also  maketh  inter- 
cession for  us"  (Rom.  8:  34)  ;  "He  ever  liveth  to  make  in- 
tercession for  them"  (Heb.  7:  25);  "A  priest  for  ever" 
(Heb.  7:  17)  ;  "I  will  pray  the  Father  for  you"  (John  16: 
26;  cf.  John  17;  also  John  14:  16)  ;  "An  Advocate  with  the 
Father"  (1  John  2:1).  There  is  a  temple  of  God  in  heaven. 
Cf.  Rev.  11:  19;  Heb.  8:  1 — 5.  Dogmaticians  differ  as  to 
whether  the  intercession  of  Christ  shall  continue  through 
eternity  or  cease  at  the  last  judgment  when  Christ  shall 
deliver  up  the  kingdom  of  God.  Quenstedt  believes  that 
the   intercession   will   continue   through   eternity,   because 

*  Exam.  Theol.  Acroam.     Pars  III,  §1,  Cap.  in,  p.  182. 

DiKjmatics.     10. 


274  SOTERIOLOGV. 

Christ  is  a  Priest  for  ever.  On  the  other  hand,  Luther 
said  that  intercession  would  continue  until  the  end  of  the 
world.  The  Lord  Jesus  Christ  is  indeed  a  Priest  and  a 
King  for  ever,  so  that  even  after  the  consummation  He  is 
considered  as  the  eternal  High  Priest,  but  intercession  in 
the  real  sense  will  no  longer  be  needed  after  the  words  of 
1  Cor.  15 :  24  have  been  fulfilled.  The  work  will  then  have 
been  finished  both  in  a  juridical  and  an  actual  sense,  and 
the  blessed  will  forever  have  inherited  all  the  results  of  the 
reconciliation. 

Dogmaticians  have  also  directed  attention  to  Rom.  8 :  26 : 
"The  Spirit  himself  maketh  intercession  for  us  with  groan- 
ings  which  cannot  be  uttered."  Cf.  verse  27.  On  the  basis 
of  these  passages  some  have  considered  that  the  Holy  Ghost 
also  intercedes  for  us,  but  Quenstedt  interprets  these 
words  to  mean  that  the  Holy  (J host  merely  urges  us  to  pray, 
teaches  us  to  pray,  and  assists  us,  as  it  were,  dynamically, 
to  formulate  our  prayers.  Quenstedt  does  not  use  the  word 
dynamically,  but  the  sense  is  the  same.  He  also  says:  "The 
one  intercession,  i.  e.,  that  of  Christ,  is  Oearöpw-n-iKyi,  the  other 
is  merely  6eiKrj.  The  one  is  mediatorial ;  the  other  is  not. 
The  intercession  of  Christ  is  founded  upon  His  suffering 
and  death,  which  cannot  be  said  of  the  intercession  of  the 
Holy  Ghost." 

Notes  on  the  History  of  Dogma. 

In  the  earliest  period  there  was  no  formulation  of  the  doc- 
trine of  reconciliation,  and  yet  reconciliation  occupied  the 
central  position  in  the  teaching  of  the  Church.  The  fre- 
quently recurring  celebrations  of  the  Lord's  Supper  prove 
that  the  majority  of  the  Christians  emphasized  the  atone- 
ment. In  the  Apologetic  period  and  partly  in  the  Polemic 
period  it  was  asserted  that  the  ransom  was  paid  to  Satan. 
The  significance  of  the  death  of  Christ  was  set  forth  from 
three  points  of  view:  as  a  redemption  from  death  and  the 
devil,  as  a  reconciliation  with  God  through  sacrifice,  and  as 
a  means  to  reach  everlasting  life.     Irenaeus  presented  the 


I 


THE   SACERDOTAL   OFFICE  OF   CHRIST.  275 

so-called  theory  of  "recapitulation."  Gregory  of  Nazianzus 
rejected  the  theory  that  the  ransom  was  paid  to  Satan  and 
declared  that  it  was  paid  to  God.  Even  during  the  Scho- 
lastic period  the  old  theory  was  still  advocated  that  the 
ransom  was  paid  to  Satan.  But  during  this  period  the  fol- 
lowing theories  of  reconciliation  appeared:  The  theory  of 
Anselm,  the  moral  theory  of  Abelard,  the  doctrine  of  *'satis- 
factio  superabundans"  of  Thomas  Aquinas  together  with  the 
''acceptation  theory"  of  Duns  Scotus.  Among  these  theories 
that  of  Anselm,  in  spite  of  its  defects,  occupies  the  most 
prominent  place.  Abelard  and  Duns  Scotus  were  fore- 
runners of  Calvinism,  teaching,  as  they  did,  that  Christ 
died  only  for  the  elect.  Among  the  mystics  the  teachings 
of  Gerson,  Tauler  and  John  Wessel  approached  the  doc- 
trines of  the  Church,  while  others,  such  as  Weigel,  Böhme 
and  Denk  departed  from>and  rejected  the  orthodox  doctrine 
of  satisfaction.  During  the  period  of  the  Reformation  the 
doctrine  of  the  atonement  was  presented  especially  by  the 
Lutheran  Reformers  in  a  very  complete  way.  The  Scrip- 
tural immediacy  of  the  Apostolic  period  again  makes  its 
appearance,  while  the  internal  experience  of  the  infinite 
guilt  of  sin  and  the  wrath  of  God  upon  the  sinner  prepares 
the  way  for  a  more  profound  conception  of  the  objective 
reconciliation  and  redemption  from  the  power  of  sin,  death 
and  the  devil.  The  relationship  between  the  love  and  justice 
of  God  is  clearly  set  forth.  Christ  bore  all  our  sins  and  the 
wrath  of  God.  The  two  natures  of  Christ  participated  in 
the  atonement.  The  active  and  passive  obedience  of  Christ 
are  presented.  God  was  reconciled  through  the  vicarious 
satisfaction  of  Christ.  The  doctrine  of  the  Reformed  Church 
suffers  from  the  influence  of  the  doctrine  of  predestination. 
After  the  Reformation  had  sown  the  seeds  of  life-giving 
truth,  Socinianism  began  to  sow  tares.  They  rejected  all 
the  essential  points  in  the  Church's  doctrine  af  satisfaction. 
The  Arminians  followed  partly  in  their  footsteps  and  advo- 
cated the  "acceptation  theory."  Hugo  Grotius  set  forth  the 
so-called  "government  theory,"  in  accordance  with  which 
God  as  a  regent  inflicted  the  punishment  of  our  sin  on  the 


276  SOTEKIOLOGY. 

Son  as  a  warning  example.  The  Supranaturalists  presented 
the  atonement  in  a  heretical  way  and  considered  that  satis- 
faction was  the  most  suitable  way.  Philosophical  Rational- 
ism advocated  the  theory  of  self-atonement.  The  vulgar 
Rationalists,  of  course,  rejected  the  doctrine  of  the  Church. 
Hegelianism  presents  the  self-atonement  of  God  in  accord- 
ance with  the  tenets  of  Pantheism.  Schleiermacher  re- 
jected the  orthodox  doctrine  of  atonement  and  emphasized 
a  subjective  redemption,  which  he  placed  before  the  atone- 
ment. The  atonement  becomes  a  subjective  state  in  man. 
Von  Hofmann  set  forth  the  so-called  "mystical  theory," 
which  presents  the  organic  union  of  Christ  with  the  human 
race,  so  that  we  were  reconciled  to  God,  not  through  Christ, 
but  in  Him.  He  therefore  denies  the  vicarious  suffering  of 
Christ.  Maurice  and  Bushnell  resurrected  the  old  moral 
theory.  The  Hofmann  theory  has  been  refuted  by  Thoma- 
sius,  Delitzsch  and  others.  Ritschlianism  places  justifica- 
tion before  reconciliation  and  rejects  the  orthodox  theory 
of  atonement  altogether.  There  have  been  many,  however, 
who  have  powerfully  refuted  the  empty  doctrine  of  atone- 
ment that  Ritschlianism  set  forth  and  have  presented  the 
juridical  doctrine  of  reconciliation.  Many  of  the  recent 
theologians  would  substitute  the  ethical  theory  of  atonement 
for  the  juridical  conception  of  punishment,  but  the  con- 
servative Lutheran  theologians  have  indeed  presented  Siihne 
and  consequently  the  ethical  element,  but  not  at  the  cost  of 
the  conception  of  the  suffering  and  punishment  from  the 
juridical  standpoint,  rather  they  have  harmonized  the  two 
conceptions.  We  now  pass  to  the  more  detailed  considera- 
tion of  the  development  of  the  doctrine  through  the  various 
periods. 

Ci.KMK.NT  ov  Ro.Mi:  says  that  Christ  gave  His  blood  for  us,  and  in  ac- 
cordance with  his  presentation  it  is  evident  that  he  taught  that  the 
death  of  Christ  was  vicarious.  Icxativs  says  that  Christ  was  a  sacri- 
fice offered  to  God  in  our  stead. 

JrsTiN  M.VKTYK  sets  forth,  somewhat  obscurely,  perhaps,  the  vicarious 
death  of  Jesus.  He  says  that  Satan  was  overcome  through  the  death 
of  Jesus.  Christ  took  upon  himself  the  condemnation  of  all.  Ikkn.t:t-s 
taught   that   the   incarnated    Son   of  God   must  conquer  sin   in  all  the 


THE   SACERDOTAL  OFFICE   OF   CPIRIST.  277 

grades  of  human  existence.     He  was  to  pass  through  all  the  ages  of 
man  in  order  to  sanctify  them,  and  in  such  wise  he  recapitulated  the 
whole  history  of  man.     With  regard  to  the  redemption  he  taught  that 
since  man  had  given  his  consent  at  the  temptation,  Satan  rightfully 
possessed  him  in  his  power.     Christ  conquered  the  devil  in  a  perfectly 
legitimate  way.     Irena^us  does  not   state  expressly,  however,  that  the 
ransom  was  paid  to  Satan.     Christ  has  reconciled  us  to  God,  making 
God  gracious,  and  thereby  procuring  the  forgiveness  of  sins  and  im- 
mortality.    Tertilliax  beheld  in  the  death  of  Christ  a  sacrifice.     He 
used  the  word  satisfactio,  although  not  in  the  current  theological  sense, 
but  as  the  sinner's   own   satisfaction.     Cypriax  says  that  Christ   con- 
quered death  through  the  victorious  sign  of  the  cross,  reconciled  us  to 
God  and  procured  for  us  forgiveness  for  the  sins  that  were  found  or 
were   committed  before   Baptism.     Oriuex   taught   that   Satan   had   ob- 
tained power  over  man  through  the  Fall.     When  man  was  to  be  liber- 
ated a  ransom  was  necessary.     Satan  demanded  the  soul  or  the  blood 
of  Jesus,  and  he  turned  Him  over  to  the  Jews  to  be  crucified.     But  he 
was  deceived  when  he  thought  that  he  would  secure  the  higher  nature 
of  Jesus  together  with  His  manhood.     He  could  not  retain  the  soul  of 
Jesus   permeated   by  the   Logos,  because  this  caused    him   great   pain. 
The   cross  of   Jesus    became   a   net   that   took    Satan   captive.      Origen 
speaks,   however,  of  the   reconciliation   of   God.     He   also   taught   that 
the  redemption  reached  into  the  whole  world  of  spirits. 

Athanasius  considered  the  death  of  Christ  as  vicarious.  Christ  set 
man  free  from  the  guilt  of  death  through  His  death.  Griicory  of 
N.\ziAxzus  said  that  the  ransom  was  paid  to  God.  Although  he  taught 
that  the  death  of  Christ  was  vicarious,  still  he  declared  that  God 
neither  needed  nor  desired  the  atonement,  but  that  it  was  of  signifi- 
cance because  men  were  sanctified  through  the  manhood  of  Jesus. 
Gregory  of  Nyzza  considered  the  redemption  as  a  redemption  from 
Satan.  Satan  demanded  Christ  because  he  liked  Him  best.  God  gave 
him  Jesus  and  therefore  arranged  an  exchange,  but  God  had  also  made 
such  arrangements  that  the  human  nature  of  Jssus  became  a  bait  for 
Satan.  In  the  human  nature  of  Jesus  there  was  hidden  the  divine 
hook  by  which  Satan  was  captured.  The  act  of  God  was  just,  because 
Satan  had  deceived  man.  At  the  same  time  it  was  an  evidence  of 
love,  since  the  connection  with  Jesus  may  at  last  save  even  the  devil. 
Ambrose  uses  the  expression  satisfactio  in  the  right  sense.  He  speaks 
of  the  beguiling  of  the  devil  as  a  pia  fraus.  Chrysostom  says  that 
Christ  died  for  us  and  thereby  won  the  favor  of  the  Father,  whose 
wrath  was  aroused  because  of  sin.  The  work  of  Christ  was  super- 
abundant, like  the  ocean  as  compared  with  a  drop  of  water.  Jerome 
believed  that  Jesus  offered  Himself  to  Satan,  who  could  not  retain 
Him.  AuGusTa.NE  said  that  God  had  dealt  legitimately  with  Satan  and 
therefore  the  ransom  was  paid  to  Him.     But  he  also  speaks  of  a  re- 


278  soti:ki()I,o(;v. 

deniption  from  the  wrath  of  God.  Christ  assumed  our  guilt  and  atoned 
for  it,  and  His  merit  is  more  than  sufficient.  Cyril  of  Alexandkia 
stated  that  the  world-atoning  power  of  the  death  of  Christ  was  de- 
pendent on  the  fact  that  His  blood  was  the  blood  of  the  Son  of  God. 
The  Father  gave  the  Son  as  a  vicarious  ransom.  Cyril  also  says  that 
the  Logos  offered  Himself  to  God  the  Father.  He  speaks  of  satisfactio 
vicaria.  Gkkcoky  the  Great  developed  the  theory  of  the  deceiving  of 
Satan,  who  is  likened  unto  leviathan  that  is  caught  by  Christ  like  a 
fish  on  a  hook.  He  would  not  state  that  Satan  had  justly  ruled  over 
men,  but  only  quasi  juste.  Jon.\  of  Damascx  s  declared  that  the  ransom 
was  paid  to  God,  but  also  taught,  however,  that  Satan  had  been  deceived 
when  he  swallowed  the  bait,  which  was  the  body  of  Christ,  and  was 
caught  by  the  hook  of  divinity. 

Anselm  presented  his  views  in  Cur  Deus  Homo.  His  starting  point 
is  the  conception  of  guilt,  and  he  rejects  the  juridical  pretensions  of 
the  devil.  Redemption  from  the  devil  presupposes  redemption  from 
sin  and  guilt.  Sin  is  an  insult  to  the  honor  of  God  and  implies  infinite 
guilt.  God  must  demand  a  restitution.  Such  a  restitution  can  take 
place  through  punishment  and  satisfaction.  But  the  punishment  would 
annihilate  man.  The  other  method  or  satisfaction  implies  a  voluntary 
payment  of  that  which  was  stolen,  but  more  must  be  given,  viz.,  some- 
thing infinite,  which  man  was  not  bound  to  pay.  God  could  not  forgive 
sins  by  His  mercy  alone,  since  that  would  overrule  His  justice.  Man 
cannot  make  satisfaction.  For  this  reason  the  Son  of  Man  came.  As 
man  He  could  represent  all  men,  but  as  God  His  life  possessed  un- 
utterable value.  His  active  obedience  did  not  possess  atoning  value, 
because  He  was  obligated  to  fulfill  all  righteousness  for  His  own  sake, 
but  He  was  not  obliged  to  give  His  life  in  death.  When,  therefore, 
Christ  voluntarily  sacrificed  His  life,  it  became  a  satisfaction  of  infinite 
worth.  And  because  it  was  more  than  enough,  it  became  necessary  for 
God  to  repay,  and  this  repayment  redounded  to  the  benefit  of  the  chil- 
dren of  men.  He  also  taught  that  the  salvation  of  men  was  intended  by 
God  to  fill  the  void  that  had  arisen  through  the  fall  of  the  angels.  The 
weaknesses  in  Anselm's  theory  consist  chiefly  in  the  following  points: 
That  he  sets  forth  the  glory  of  God  at  the  cost  of  the  divine  holiness; 
that  the  work  of  Christ  is  considered  from  the  quantitative  standpoint; 
that  the  active  obedience  is  excluded,  and  that  the  mathematical  limita- 
tion disturbs  the  Christians'  assurance  of  salvation.  Ahelakd  combatted 
the  Anselm  theory  and  set  forth  the  so-called  "moral  theory,"  in  ac- 
cordance with  which  the  atonement  became  subjective,  the  love  of 
Christ  nullifying  the  enmity  of  man  and  arousing  in  his  heart  love  to 
God.  He  says,  however,  that  Christ  was  a  ransom  that  was  paid  to 
the  Father.  Redemption  was  intended  only  for  the  elect.  Hico  of 
St.  Victok  set  forth  the  necessity  of  the  divine  assistance  in  order  that 
man  might  be  liberated  from  the  power  of  Satan.     Through  the  recon- 


THE    SACERnOTAI,  OFEICE  OF   CHRIST.  279 

ciliation  God  became  willing  to  help  man  against  the  devil.  He  also 
taught  that  God  could  have  carried  out  the  redemption  in  some  other 
way,  but  the  way  determined  upon  was  the  most  serviceable.  Bekx- 
iiAKD  OF  Clah'.vaux  conceived  of  the  atonement  objectively.  God  re- 
deemed us  through  the  blood  of  His  Son.  But  the  ransom  was  paid  to 
the  devil.  In  the  doctrine  of  reconciliation  he  set  forth  the  ethical 
element  and  that  Christ  as  the  head  made  satisfaction  for  the  members. 
Petek  Lombard  stated  that  Christ  had  set  His  cross  as  a  trap  for  Satan. 
Alexander  of  Hales  said  that  Christ  as  the  head  made  satisfaction  for 
the  members.  But  he  confuses  the  objective  and  subjective  conceptions 
of  the  atonement.  Thomas  Aquinas  denied  the  absolute  necessity  of 
satisfaction.  God  could  have  forgiven  the  guilt  without  setting  His 
justice  aside,  but  the  sufferings  of  Christ  constituted  the  most  suitable 
way.  He  presented  the  doctrine  of  "satisfactio  superabundans"  by 
reason  of  the  great  value  of  the  life  of  the  God-man  and  also  because 
of  the  ethical  element  in  the  atonement.  The  sufferings  of  Christ, 
however,  were  limited  to  His  human  nature.  He  did  not  suffer  the 
anguish  of  hell.  The  transfer  of  the  merit  of  Christ  to  the  children  of 
men  was  made  possible  through  the  mystical  union  between  Christ  as 
the  head  and  the  congregation  as  the  members.  Dl'ns  Scotus  rejected 
the  doctrine  of  "satisfactio  superabundans"  and  stated  that  God  had 
accepted  the  atonement  of  His  own  free  pleasure.  He  therefore  advo- 
cated the  so-called  "acceptation  theory."  The  merit  of  Christ  was 
intended  only  for  the  elect.  With  regard  to  the  sufferings  of  Christ 
he  taught  that  it  was  only  the  human  nature  that  suffered.  He  did  not 
place  high  value  on  the  sufferings  of  Christ  and  did  not  consider  that 
they  were  necessary  in  an  absolute  sense,  since  every  man  could  have 
made  satisfaction  for  himself.  But  the  atonement  of  Christ  was  never- 
theless the  best  because  through  it  we  are  influenced  to  love  God. 
Gabriel  Biel,  on  the  other  hand,  placed  the  highest  value  on  the  atone- 
ment of  Christ.  One  drop  of  the  blood  of  Christ  would  have  been 
sufficient  for  our  redemption.  He  speaks  of  the  vicarious  death  of 
Christ  and  sets  forth  the  significance  of  the  justice  and  love  of  God 
in  redemption. 

Luther  considered  the  atonement  from  two  points  of  view.  In  the 
first  place  he  set  forth  the  concept  of  atonement,  clearly  presenting 
its  vicarious  character,  that  Christ  fulfilled  the  Law  in  our  stead, 
thereby  appeasing  the  wrath  of  God.  The  vicariousness  of  the  atone- 
ment is  looked  upon  as  an  exchange,  the  Lord  Christ  taking  upon 
Himself  our  sins  and  suffering  t)ur  punishment.  He  also  set  forth  the 
redemption,  implying  a  victorious  fight  against  the  evil  powers,  a 
redemption  from  the  power  of  sin,  death  and  the  devil.  Melanchthon 
agreed  with  Luther  and  took  as  his  point  of  departure  the  justice  of 
God  which  was  satisfied  with  the  punishment.  A  mediation  was  neces- 
sary between  the  divine   righteousness  and  love.     Christ   became   the 


280  SOTERIOLOGV. 

Mediator  who  suffered  the  punishment  of  sin,  the  eternal  damnation, 
and  tliercfore  bore  the  wrath  of  God.  Melanchthon  also  set  forth  tho 
ethical  element  in  the  atonement.  Bkk.nz  stated  that  the  wrath  of  God 
had  been  reconciled.  Calvin  and  the  Reformed  theologians  on  the 
whole  taught  about  the  same  as  the  Lutheran  theologians,  except  that 
their  doctrine  of  predestination  made  necessary  the  concomitant  doc- 
trine of  satisfactio  limitata.  Their  standpoint  in  the  Christological 
question  also  exerted  its  influence  so  that  their  doctrine  of  the  atone- 
ment was  not  as  complete  as  Luther's.  The  theologians  of  the  Catholic 
Church  held  the  doctrine  of  satisfactio  superabundans,  which  is  con- 
trolled by  the  Church.  Despite  this  fact  they  taught  that  the  satis- 
faction of  Christ  was  sufficient  from  the  practical  point  of  view  for 
original  sin,  but  for  other  sins  other  satisfactions  were  necessary,  al- 
though these  must  stand  related  to  the  merit  of  Christ.  The  satisfac- 
tions have  reference  especially  to  earthly  punishments  and  the  pains 
of  purgatory.  Out  of  the  theory  of  Anselm  the  Lutheran  Church 
retained  such  points  as  the  following:  Not  only  man  needed  reconcilia- 
tion, but  God  also  demanded  a  reconciliation;  reconciliation  implied 
a  removal  of  the  guilt  of  sin,  while  the  atoning  sacrifice  must  be  the 
equivalent  of  the  burden  of  sin  to  be  removed.  Of  course,  the  weak- 
nesses of  Anselm's  theory  were  rejected.  But  in  addition  the  Lutherans 
set  forth:  That  God  was  interested  in  the  reconciliation  for  man's  sake 
also;  it  was  not  so  much  the  honor  of  God  that  demanded  reconcilia- 
tion as  His  righteousness  and  love;  Christ  bore  the  wrath  of  God  and 
therefore  suffered  the  punishment  of  sin,  and  this  voluntarily;  both 
the  active  and  passive  obedience  of  Christ  possess  significance  as  satis- 
factions, wherefore  the  reconciliation  is  the  presupposition  of  the  for- 
giveness of  sins  and  justification;  finally,  it  may  be  stated  that  the 
Lutherans  taught  that  the  atonement  of  Christ  was  intended  for  all. 
The  Socinians  reject  the  doctrine  of  the  vicarious  death  of  Christ. 
The  principal  points  in  their  doctrine  are  the  following:  No  satisfac- 
tion is  necessary,  since  God  can  forgive  without  it.  Guilt,  punishment 
and  merit  cannot  be  transferred  from  one  person  to  another.  It  would 
be  unjust  if  the  innocent  were  to  suffer  for  the  guilty.  If  God  were 
to  demand  both  punishment  for  sin  and  also  the  fulfillment  of  the  Law, 
He  would  be  requiring  pay  twice  over.  If  Christ  has  fulfilled  the  Law 
in  our  stead,  then  God  can  demand  nothing  of  us.  So  far  as  sufferings 
were  concerned  Christ  could  not  suffer  the  eternal  punishment  of  hell. 
Moreover,  Christ  was  Himself  as  a  man  obligated  to  fulfill  the  Law 
(obedientia  activa),  and  His  suffering  was  merely  that  of  a  martyr. 
If  He  died  in  the  stead  of  all  men,  then  no  man  ought  to  die.  His 
death  was  merely  a  confirmation  of  His  teaching  and  a  test  of  love. 
They  reject  the  high-priestly  office  of  Christ  and  mostly  emphasize  His 
calling  as  a  teacher  and  the  moral  example  of  His  life.  God  was  not 
reconciled    through    the    active   and    passive    obedience    of    Christ,    but 


THE    SACERDOTAL    OFFICE    OF    CHRIST.  281 

revealed  Himself  as  reconciled  in  all  that  Jesus  did.  Since  Christ  in 
recompense  for  His  service  was  glorified  and  received  divine  glory  and 
regal  honor,  therefore  He  is  able  to  serve  us  continually  and  to  liberate 
the  faithful  from  their  sins.  Parsimonius  and  Piscator  (especially 
the  latter)  advocated  the  view  that  obedientia  activa  was  the  personal 
obligation  of  Christ  and  had  therefore  no  significance  for  us.  The 
Armi)tians  like  the  Socinians  rejected  the  doctrine  that  Christ  had 
suffered  our  punishment.  But  they  say  that  the  work  of  Christ  was 
a  sacrifice  that  procures  for  us  forgiveness.  Still  the  sacrifice  was  not 
an  adequate  satisfaction,  but  God  accepted  it  as  valid.  Hrco  Grottus 
set  forth  the  so-called  "government  theory."  He  denied  the  ground 
of  satisfaction  in  the  punitive  righteousness  of  God.  God  is  not  con- 
sidered as  being  personally  offended,  but  as  a  regent.  As  a  regent  He 
must  maintain  the  majesty  of  the  Law  and  punish  transgression.  The 
Son  of  God  was  delivered  unto  death  for  us  and  the  punishment  of  sin 
was  visited  on  Him  in  order  that  He  might  become  a  warning  example. 
By  reason  of  the  suffering  of  the  Son,  God  could  exercise  commutatio 
and  forgive  sins.  It  is  not  necessary  to  set  forth  in  detail  the  views 
of  our  old  orthodox  Dogmaticians.  We  would  simply  call  attention 
to  Quenstedt's  doctrine  of  derelictio.  He  teaches  that  a  separation 
took  place  between  the  Logos  and  Jesus  during  derelictio.  Of  course, 
this  view  is  misleading. 

Kant  presents  Christ  as  the  ideal  man  from  the  moral  point  of  view. 
The  doctrine  of  the  Son  of  God  as  a  vicarious  mediator  is  merely 
symbolic  and  implies  that  the  new  man  in  us  is  to  suffer  the  punish- 
ment for  the  sins  of  the  old  man.  Man  must  reconcile  himself.  In 
this  reconciliation  he  ought  to  suffer  in  the  same  spirit  as  Christ. 
The  Rationalists,  such  as  Wegscheider.  rejected  the  high-priestly  office 
of  Christ  and  merely  set  forth  His  prophetic  office.  The  death  of  Christ 
was  the  death  of  a  martyr.  The  Supranaturalists  said  that  the  suf- 
ferings and  death  of  Christ  constituted  a  warning  example.  Satisfactio 
was  the  most  suitable  way  and  the  best  means  of  deterring  men  from 
sin  and  urging  them  to  repentance.  While  Kant  taught  the  self- 
reconciliation  of  man,  Schelling  and  Hegel,  on  the  other  hand,  taught 
the  reconciliation  of  God  with  Himself.  Hegel  said  that  the  death  of 
the  Son  implied  that  the  negative  element  had  entered  into  the  divine 
self-development,  and  that  His  resurrection  constituted  a  negation  of 
the  negation.  The  objective  reconciliation  is  the  realization  of  the 
self-consciousness  of  God  in  man,  while  the  subjective  atonement  is 
the  realization  of  the  unity  of  the  finite  spirit  with  the  absolute. 
GÖSCHEL  belonged  to  the  right  wing  of  Hegel's  disciples.  He  teaches 
that  the  divine  righteousness  and  love  are  one,  and  that  the  wrath  of 
God's  righteousness  is  merely  the  zeal  of  love.  He  denies  the  absolute 
necessity  of  satisfaction.  In  a  certain  sense  Christ  is  a  vicarious 
mediator,  but  He  did  not  suffer  vicariously.     The  object  of  punishment 


282  SOTERIOI.OGY. 

is  restitutio  in  integrum.  Tlie  guilty  person  must  enter  into  relation- 
ship with  the  mediator,  or,  figuratively,  the  sick  portion  of  the  body 
must  be  united  with  the  sound  organism,  which  suffers  for  the  ailing 
part.  ScHLKiEii.MAt'HKK  couUl  uot  accept  the  Church  doctrine  of 
satisfaction  because  he  did  not  have  a  right  conception  of  the  Trinity 
or  of  sin.  The  suffering  of  Christ  was  vicarious  only  in  the  sense 
that  He  shared  with  man  the  consciousness  of  sin,  but  it  was  not  a 
satisfactio,  since  we  all  must  share  the  sufferings  of  Christ.  The  death 
of  Christ  was  the  death  of  a  martyr.  Through  the  redemption  that 
was  procured  through  Christ  there  was  implanted  in  the  human  race 
a  new  power  of  life,  whicli  is  mediated  through  the  Church.  Christ 
possessed  the  consciousness  of  God  in  its  fulness.  In  the  Church  is 
found  the  principle  of  redemption  through  which  the  divine  conscious- 
ness is  strengthened  in  us.  Our  redemption  consists  in  our  transla- 
tion into  the  strong  consciousness  of  the  divine  as  it  is  in  Christ,  while 
our  atonement  consists  in  participating  in  the  blessedness  of  Christ. 
The  atonement,  therefore,  is  merely  a  subjective  state.  Menke.n  em- 
phasized the  love  of  God,  which  did  not  require  any  vicarious  satis- 
faction. The  reconciliation  is  conceived  of  in  a  subjective  sense  and 
consists  in  man's  reconciliation  with  God.  He  made  violent  attacks 
on  the  orthodox  doctrine  of  atonement.  The  sufferings  of  Christ  had 
no  connection  with  guilt  and  punishment,  but  only  with  sin,  which 
was  to  be  annihilated.  Christ  was  exposed  to  all  kinds  of  temptations 
and  sufferings,  but  He  stood  the  test  and  presented  a  human  nature 
without  sin.  Clirist  became  the  principle  of  purification  for  the  salva- 
tion of  men  from  sin.  Sartorius  presented  the  ethical  element  in  the 
vicarious  suffering  of  Christ.  He  says  that  the  punishment  does  not 
atone,  but  the  sacrifice.  Nor  is  the  suffering  sufficient,  the  punishment 
must  be  endured  with  self-renunciation  r.nd  with  complete  consecration 
to  the  will  of  God.  Vox  Hokmanx  presented  the  so-called  "compen- 
sative theory."  The  sacrifices  were  intended  to  teach  men  that  God 
docs  not  forgive  sins  without  further  consideration;  that  man  must 
make  satisfaction  througli  sacrifice.  Like  others,  who  in  thought  ap- 
proach the  position  of  Schleiermacher,  he  was  a  representative  of  the 
so-called  "mystical  theory."  We  are  reconciled  in  Christ  by  reason  of 
the  mystical  union  with  Christ.  The  new  humanity,  well-pleasing  to 
God,  was  presented  in  the  person  of  Christ.  Christ  realized  His  calling 
as  a  Saviour,  not  as  a  mediator  who  suffered  our  punishment,  but  as 
the  representative  of  the  race,  who  endured  the  sufferings  of  humanity 
and  stood  the  test  perfectly.  His  sufferings  came  from  beneath  rather 
than  from  above.  But  this  suffering  did  not  imply  an  appeasing  of  the 
wrath  of  God.  He  therefore  rejects  the  Church  doctrine  of  the  theory 
of  satisfaction.  Maihick  advocated  the  "moral  theory."  He  stated 
that  the  suffering  and  death  of  Christ  constituted  a  perfectly  conse- 
crated sacrifice  before  God  and  then  cites  many  examples  to  show  the 


THE    SACEKUOTAL   OFFICE    OF    CHRIST.  283 

self-sacrifice  which  every  man  is  obligated  to  make  before  God.  Bush- 
NELL,  was  also  an  advocate  of  the  moral  theory  of  atonement.  He  stated 
that  Christ  suffered  out  of  sympathy  for  us  and  because  of  the  con- 
sciousness of  solidarity  with  us,  through  all  of  which  He  acquired 
moral  power  over  us.  Thomasius  together  with  other  theologians 
opposed  the  theory  of  Hofmann  and  other  related  theories.  He  repre- 
sents the  Church  doctrine  of  atonement  and  presents  the  doctrine 
from  three  aspects,  viz.,  as  satisfaction  or  Genugthuung,  atoning  or 
Siihnung,  and  reconciliation  or  Versöhnung.  In  the  second  of  these 
aspects  he  presents  the  ethical  element  of  the  atonement,  but  does  not 
sufficiently  emphasize  the  significance  of  obedientia  activa.  Philippi 
in  general  adheres  closely  to  the  symbols  and  the  older  dogmatic 
development.  He  lays  equal  emphasis  on  obedientia  activa  and 
passiva.  In  relation  to  the  sacrifice  B.vhr  presented  a  "symbolic 
theory"  and  stated  that  as  the  sacrificial  animals  gave  their  life  and 
blood  to  God,  so  man  must  submit  himself  to  God,  which  takes  its 
beginning  in  contrition  and  through  justification  is  made  complete  in 
sanctification.  Keil  said  that  the  slaying  of  the  animal  did  not  per  se 
imply  any  satisfaction,  although  the  sinner  must  know  that  sin  implied 
punishment.  The  reconciliation  consisted  in  the  blood,  which  is  the 
symbol  of  life.  By  reason  of  the  shedding  of  blood  the  sinner  was 
received  into  fellowship  with  the  God  of  love.  Kiktz  sets  forth  the 
juridical  doctrine  of  reconciliation  and  views  the  slaying  of  the  sacri- 
fice as  a  punishment,  while  its  suffering  was  considered  as  a  satisfactio 
vicaria.  Therefore  the  antitype  must  also  suffer  our  punishment  in 
our  stead,  so  that  His  suffering  might  become  a  satisfactio  vicaria. 
RiTscHL  was  a  disciple  of  Weisse  and  Lotze.  Herein  lies  partly  the 
explanation  of  Ritschlianism.  Ritschl  considers  God  only  as  love. 
The  justice  of  God  is  merely  the  sequence  through  which  the  divine 
love  cares  for  the  welfare  of  those  that  belong  to  His  kingdom.  He 
rejects  the  doctrine  of  justitia  punitiva.  Christ  has  revealed  the  love 
of  the  Father.  He  was  one  with  the  Father  only  through  His  ethical 
obedience  and  subordination  to  the  Father,  while  His  redemption  con- 
sisted in  teaching  men  to  will  to  do  the  Father's  will.  Then  we  feel 
blessed  and  independent  of  all  that  happens.  We  must  believe  that 
the  Father  is  not  subject  to  wrath.  Our  atonement  does  not  take 
place  through  satisfaction  and  expiation,  but  through  our  faith  in  God 
as  unchangeable  love.  When  we  are  liberated  from  fear  and  approach 
God,  then  we  are  reconciled.  Martensex  acknowledges  that  the  atone- 
ment has  significance  before  God  and  that  ithe  opposition  between  the 
love  and  righteousness  of  God  was  solved  in  the  objective  reconcilia- 
tion. However,  his  presentation  of  the  objective  reconciliation  is  not 
completely  clear.  Gkanfelt  takes  the  conception  of  love  as  his  point 
of  departure  and  emphasizes  the  solidarity  between  Christ  and  tho 
children  of  men.    He  calls  his  conception  of  the  atonement  the  "ethical 


ä84  SOTKRIOLOGY. 

organic  theory."  But  he  rejects  the  juridical  conception.  He  makes 
comparisons  between  Von  Hofmann  and  Thomasius,  stating  that  he 
must  needs  side  with  the  Churcli  doctrine  against  Von  Hofmann  and 
witli  Von  Hofmann  against  tlie  Church  doctrine.  He  criticizes  Von 
Hofmann  because  of  the  latter's  position  that  Christ  came  in  contact 
with  sin  only  as  an  evil,  which  indeed  caused  Him  great  anguish,  but 
that  this  suffering  was  not  endured  as  a  punishment  in  the  place  of 
all  men.  On  the  other  hand,  he  criticizes  Thomasius  because  he  taught 
that  Christ  bore  the  guilt  and  punishment  of  sin.  The  theory  of  Gran- 
felt  is  related  to  that  of  Waldenstuom,*  and  he  acknowledges  that 
they  have  a  common  starting  point,  but  he  criticizes  the  latter's  posi- 
tion for  one  reason,  among  others,  because  he  does  not  set  forth  th:; 
solidarity  between  Christ  and  the  children  of  men.  Granfelt  denies 
that  the  death  of  Christ  is  to  be  looked  upon  as  being  demanded  by 
the  punitive  righteousness  of  God.  Christ  suffered  as  the  head  of  the 
human  race  in  such  manner  that  He  experienced  in  concentrated  form 
the  suffering  which  God  had  determined  upon  as  an  unavoidable  con- 
sequence of  sin,  but  God  was  not  directly  active  in  the  Son's  passion. 
Many  of  the  theologians  of  the  Church  of  Sweden  have  strongly  op- 
posed the  modern  theories,  which  to  a  greater  or  less  degree  rejecL 
the  orthodox  theory  of  reconciliation.  Among  these  may  be  mentioned 
A.  F.  Beckman  and  M.  Johansson. 

LuTHABDT  states,  on  the  one  hand,  that  the  Son,  who  united  in  Him- 
self the  human  race,  had  to  the  uttermost  experienced  the  wrath  of 
God  and  suffered  the  punishment  of  human  sin;  on  the  other  hand, 
the  love  of  Christ,  manifested  in  the  willingness  with  which  He  obe- 
diently suffered  and  in  His  continuance  in  holiness  in  the  face  of  all 
assaults,   has   constituted   His   sufferings   as   an   act   which   in   ethical 

*  Waldenstrom  rejects  the  doctrine  of  the  reconciliation  of  God  and 
sets  forth  the  reconciliation  of  man.  Concerning  the  necessity  of 
reconciliation  he  states  that  an  atonement  that  appeased  God  was  not 
necessary,  but  only  one  that  took  away  the  sins  of  man.  The  atone- 
ment did  not  depend  on  the  demands  of  the  injured  righteousness  of 
God  for  restitution.  In  His  suffering  Christ  was  not  our  mediator  to 
remove  the  wrath  of  God,  but  the  mediator  of  God  to  take  away  our 
sins.  Christ  did  not  die  in  our  stead,  but  only  for  our  benefit.  His 
active  and  passive  obedience  does  not  constitute  any  satisfaction  before 
God  for  our  sins.  His  suffering  was,  therefore,  not  a  vicarious  punitive 
punishment  for  our  sins.  As  a  mediator  Christ  is  viewed  as  a  middle- 
person.  With  regard  to  the  doctrine  of  redemption  and  the  ransom  he 
states  that  the  Scriptures  do  not  mention  to  whom  it  was  paid,  but  if 
the  figure  were  carried  through  to  its  logical  sequence,  then,  he  thought, 
the  old  teachers  were  right  in  their  contention  that  it  was  paid  to 
Satan.  But  he  says  that  the  figure  merely  means  that  salvation  is 
generally  considered  as  a  liberation.  In  the  doctrine  of  reconciliation 
there  is  a  marked  similarity  between  Waldenstrom  and  Socinus.  Com- 
pare Dr.  O.  Olsson  on  the  Reformation  and  Socinianism.  Samlade 
skrifter.  III. 


THE    REGAL   OFFICE   OF    CHRIST.  285 

import  corresponds  to  the  divine  and  as  a  sacrifice  that  was  well- 
pleasing  to  God.  Christ  satisfied  the  holiness  and  love  of  God,  or  the 
holy  will  of  His  love,  otfered  an  atoning  sacrifice  for  sin  through  the 
union  of  corresponding  suffering  and  activity,  through  which  in  Him- 
self He  reconciled  the  human  race  unto  God  and  redeemed  it  from 
sin  and  its  effects. 


§22.  THE  REGAL  OFFICE  OF  CHRIST. 

MUNUS  REGIUM  is  that  office  through  luhich  Christ  as  to 
His  entire  person  rules  over  the  ivhole  universe  and  espe- 
cially His  Church  until  He  shall  have  delivered  up  the  con- 
quered and  perfected  kingdom  to  God  (1  Cor.  15:  24 — 28), 
after  ivhich  He  shall  as  the  God-man  and  the  Second  Person 
in  the  Tiinity  rule,  although  in  a  different  way,  together 
ivith  the  Father  and  the  Holy  Ghost  in  the  eternal  kingdom 
of  glory. 

The  regal  office  of  Christ  is  thus  defined  by  Quenstedt:* 
"Munus  regium  is  that  function  of  Christ,  the  God-man, 
through  which  He  divinely  controls  and  governs,  in  accord- 
ance with  both  natures,  the  divine  and  the  human,  and  the 
latter  as  exalted  to  the  Right  Hand  of  Majesty,  all  creatures 
in  their  totality  in  the  kingdom  of  power,  grace  and  glory, 
by  infinite  majesty  and  power,  as  to  the  divinity  by  virtue 
of  the  eternal  generation,  and  as  to  His  assumed  human 
nature,  by  virtue  of  the  personal  union  belonging  to  Him." 
The  human  nature  of  Christ  was  made  the  recipient  of  regal 
glory  at  the  incarnation,  but,  save  in  exceptional  cases,  He 
did  not  exercise  His  divine  power  during  the  period  of  His 
humiliation.  The  state  of  exaltation,  however,  implied  that, 
also  in  accordance  with  His  human  nature.  He  again  exer- 
cised in  full  the  prerogatives  of  His  divine  glory.  Even  in 
the  greatest  depth  of  His  humiliation  Christ  confessed  that 
He  was  a  King.     Compare  John  18 :  37 :  "Pilate  therefore 

*  Quenstedt:  "OflScium  regium  est  functio  Christi  deavOpwirov,  qua  is 
secundum  utramque  naturam,  divinam  e't  humanam  et  hanc  quiöem  ad 
dextram  majestatis  exaltam,  omnes  omnino  creaturas  in  regno  potentise, 
gratis?  et  glorise  majestate  et  virtute  infinita,  quoad  divinitatem  ex 
generatione  seterna,  quoad  assumtam  humanitatem  ex  personali  unione 
ipsi  competente,  modo  divino,  moderatur  et  gubernat." 


286  SOTKRIOI.OGY. 

said  unto  him,  Art  thou  a  king  then?  Jesus  answered,  Thou 
sayest  that  I  am  a  king."  In  John  13 :  3  we  read :  "Jesus, 
knowing  that  the  Father  had  given  all  things  into  his  hands." 
This  power  Christ  began  to  exercise  in  accordance  with 
His  entire  person,  and  therefore  also  as  to  His  human 
nature,  at  the  time  of  His  quickening.  The  first  stages  of 
His  exaltation  included  His  ascending  the  throne,  which  was 
completed  at  the  ascension.  Seated  at  the  right  hand  of  the 
Father,  He  reigns  in  the  kingdom  of  power  and  grace  in 
heaven.  His  dominion  in  the  kingdom  of  grace  is  called 
Christocratic  under  a  pneumatocratic  form.  At  His  second 
coming  or  in  the  judgment  period  this  dominion  will  become 
more  directly  Christocratic,  and  when  the  kingdom,  in  ac- 
cordance with  1  Cor.  15 :  24,  is  delivered  up  to  God  and  the 
Father,  then  His  dominion  together  with  the  Father  and 
the  Holy  Ghost  will  be  a  theocratic  dominion  throughout 
eternity. 

1.    Christ  as  King. 

Jesus  Christ  was  born  to  be  a  King.  Compare  John  18 : 
37.  In  a  way  He  was  also  acknowledged  as  a  King  on  the 
cross.  Through  the  cross  He  gained  the  victory.  In  three 
of  the  leading  languages  of  the  world  it  was  stated  that  He 
was  the  King  of  the  Jews.  But  He  was  not  merely  the  King 
of  the  Jews,  He  was  the  King  of  the  whole  world.  After 
the  quickening  He  descended  into  Hades  and  declared  His 
victory,  whereupon  His  resurrection  (resurrectio  externa) 
took  place,  through  which  He  was  sealed  in  His  threefold 
office,  and  hence  also  a  King.  His  ascension  constituted  His 
coronation.  He  now  shares  the  divine  power  with  the  Fa- 
ther and  the  Holy  Ghost,  but  in  a  special  sense  He  is  King 
and  is  called  the  King  of  kings  and  Lord  of  lords,  and  as 
such  He  shall  return  in  His  second  advent. 

The  following  negative  and  positive  attributes  are  ascribed 
to  His  dominion  or  characterizes  Him  as  King:  1)  Non 
nomirmlis,  sed  realis,  which  term  is  used  against  the  Socini- 
ans,  who  said  that  before  His  death  Christ  was  not  a  real 
King,  but  simply  rex  designatus.     It  is  also  used  against 


THE    KECAL   OFFICE   OF    CHHIST.  287 

the  Rationalists,  who  deny  both  His  divinity  and  His  king- 
dom. 2)  Non  metaphoricus,  seel  naturalis,  inasmuch  as  the 
RationaHsts  judge  of  Him  as  the  Stoics  in  calling  a  wise 
man  a  king,  but  it  was  natural  for  Christ  to  be  King,  since 
to  this  end  was  He  born.  He  was  truly  a  King.  3)  Non 
mere  moralis,  sed  personalis,  since  Christ  is  not  merely  a 
King  through  His  moral  influence,  but  in  a  personal  sense. 
Although  the  dominion  of  Christ  is  in  a  sense  mediated 
through  the  work -of  the  Holy  Ghost,  still  Christ  reigns  in 
a  personal  way.  Many  Scripture  passages  set  forth  this 
truth.  Shortly  before  His  ascension,  or  on  the  occasion  of 
.the  institution  of  Baptism,  which  took  place  in  Galilee  at 
the  great  gathering  of  the  disciples.  He  said:  "Lo,  I  am 
with  you  always,  even  unto  the  end  of  the  world"  (Matt. 
28:  20).  Compare  Acts  9:  4—19  and  1  Cor.  15:  25:  "For 
he  must  reign,  till  he  hath  put  all  his  enemies  under  his 
feet." 

2.    The  Kingdom  of  Christ  or  the  Kingdom  of  God. 

Since  Christ  is  a  King  in  a  real  sense.  He  must  also  have 
a  kingdom.  The  kingdom  is  called  in  the  Scriptures  the 
kingdom  of  God,  the  kingdom  of  the  Father,  the  kingdom, 
the  kingdom  of  Christ,  and  the  kingdom  of  heaven.  This 
kingdom  was  also  found  in  the  -Old  Testament  and  for  a 
time  took  form  in  the  Jewish  theocracy.  When  the  Son  of 
God  became  incarnate  in  the  flesh,  then  the  kingdom  came 
in  a  higher  sense.  For  this  reason  the  forerunner  of  Christ 
preached  on  the  text  or  the  theme :  "The  kingdom  of  heaven 
is  at  hand"  (Matt.  3:2).  Christ  and  His  disciples  also 
preached  concerning  the  kingdom.  However,  the  kingdom 
did  not  appear  as  the  majority  expected.  The  disciples  on 
the  way  to  Emmaus  said :  "But  we  hoped  that  it  was  he  who 
should  redeem  Israel"  (Luke  24:  21).  Just  before  the 
ascension  the  disciples  asked  the  Lord :  "Lord,  dost  thou 
at  this  time  restore  the  kingdom  to  Israel?"  (Acts  1:6). 
They  did  not  receive  any  answer  as  to  the  revelation  of  the 
kingdom  in  glory,  but  Christ  directed  their  attention  to  the 
development  of  the  kingdom  through  the  activity  of  the 


288  SOTEIUOI.OGY. 

Holy  (;host.  Immediately  thereafter  Christ  ascended  the 
throne  of  His  glory.  There  were  two  angels  who  spoke  on 
that  occasion  of  the  second  advent  of  Christ.  There  are 
many  passages  that  set  forth  the  fact  that  at  the  second 
coming  of  Christ  His  kingdom  sjhall  appear  as  a  kingdom 
of  justice  and  glory.  Although  we  lay  stress  on  the  spir- 
itual kingdom  of  Christ  and  the  kingdom  of  heaven,  still 
we  must  not  forget  that  He  likewise  reigns  in  the  kingdom 
of  power.  He  is  King  in  the  kingdom  of  power,  of  grace 
of  justice,  and  of  glory. 

1)  Regnum  pnf entire.  Christ's  sitting  at  the  right  hand 
of  power  denotes  His  participation  in  the  divine  govern- 
ment of  the  world.  The  creation  of  the  world  was  mediated 
through  the  Son,  and  opera  ad  extra  as  well  as  opera  at- 
tributa  are  indivisa.  The  Son  was  the  principle  and  founda- 
tion of  the  whole  creation  as  well  as  its  original  prototype. 
He  is  the  ground,  the  means,  as  well  as  the  goal  of  creation. 
Compare  Col.  1 :  16,  17.  The  latter  passage  states  that  all 
things  consist  in  Him.  In  Heb.  1:  3  we  read:  "And  up- 
holding all  things  by  the  word  of  his  power."  This  expres- 
sion also  coincides  with  the  words  of  Christ  Himself:  "All 
authority  hath  been  given  unto  me  in  heaven  and  on  earth" 
(Matt.  28:  18).  The  God-man  possesses  not  only  spiritual 
but  also  temporal  power,"  Christ  not  only  reigns  in  the 
Church,  but  also  in  the  world,  as  God  rules.  He  is  therefore 
King  in  the  kingdom  of  power  and  can  do  whatsoever  is 
in  harmony  with  His  holy,  wise  and  benevolent  will.  As 
King  in  the  kingdom  of  power  He  can  also  serve  His  Church 
and  punish  her  enemies. 

2)  Regnum  gratise.  The  kingdom  of  grace  is  that  king- 
dom of  Christ  where  He  reigns  partly  in  a  pneumatocratic 
way  through  the  m.eans  of  grace,  and  partly  in  more  direct 
fashion,  dynamically  and  personally,  in  order  that  men 
might  be  made  partakers  of  His  saving  grace  and  become 
members  of  the  kingdom  of  glory  which  constitutes  the  goal 
of  the  kingdom  of  grace. 

Jesus  presented,  while  on  earth,  many  parables  concern- 
ing  the   beginning,    development    and    completion    of    His 


THE    REGAL   OFFICE   OF    CHRIST.  289 

kingdom.  Among  such  parables  we  find  that  those  con- 
tained in  Matthew  13  have  special  significance,  inasmuch 
as  they  not  only  portray  the  kingdom  of  grace  at  all  times, 
but  seem  to  characterize  special  periods  in  the  development 
of  the  kingdom  of  God.  In  this  respect  they  are  partly 
analogous  to  the  letters  of  Jesus  to  the  seven  churches.  The 
parable  of  the  sower  portrays  the  establishment  of  the  king- 
dom of  Christ  through  the  great  missionary  activities  that 
were  carried  on  during  the  first  Apostolic  period  and  the 
immediately  succeeding  period  down  to  250.  This  period 
is  also  portrayed  in  Rev.  2 :  1 — 7.  The  second  parable,  that 
of  the  tares  among  the  wheat,  tells  how  heresies  arose.  The 
letter  to  the  Church  in  Smyrna  portrays  to  a  certain  extent 
the  same  period  down  to  313,  i.  e.,  the  period  of  the  persecu- 
tions. However,  the  parable  runs  further  on  in  time.  The 
third  parable,  that  of  the  mustard  seed,  sets  forth  the  small 
beginning  of  the  kingdom,  but  also  its  wonderful  growth  into 
a  great  tree,  so  that  the  birds  of  the  heaven  came  and  lodged 
in  its  branches.  Reference  is  here  made  to  the  historical 
fact  of  Christianity  becoming  the  religion  of  the  nations. 
The  character  of  this  period  corresponds  to  the  content  of 
the  letter  to  Pergamus  and  includes  the  period  from  313  or 
323  to  the  seventh  century.  The  word  Pergamus  means 
both  a  tower  and  marriage.  During  this  period  the  king- 
dom appeared  as  a  tower  and  entered  into  marriage 
relations  with  the  world.  The  fourth,  the  parable  of  the 
leaven,  shows  how  the  kingdom  through  its  inward  power 
permeates  society  and  exercises  its  great  influence,  which 
was  also  portrayed  in  the  letter  to  Thyatira.  This  period 
began  in  the  seventh  century  and  continued  for  some  time. 
During  this  period  Jezebel  represents  the  Church  of  Rome. 
The  fifth  parable,  that  of  the  hidden  treasure,  depicts  the 
kingdom  of  God  during  the  Dark  Ages  and  the  early  part 
of  the  Reformation  period,  when  the  treasure  was  found. 
This  period  is  also  characterized  in  the  letter  to  Sardis. 
The  sixth  parable,  concerning  the  pearl  of  great  price,  is 
descriptive  of  the  period  succeeding  the  Reformation  down 
to  the  present  time.     The  letter  to  Philadelphia  portrays 


290  SOTFRIOI.OtiY. 

the  same  period.  During  the  last  few  centuries  missionary 
activities  have  flourished,  the  Gospel  pearls  of  great  price 
have  been  carried  from  shore  to  shore,  from  country  to 
country,  brotherly  love  has  been  made  manifest  in  divers 
w^ays  through  Christian  organizations  and  institutions  of 
charity,  while  a  powerful  spiritual  activity  has  been  every- 
where in  evidence  in  the  kingdom  of  Christ.  The  last  or 
the  seventh  parable,  that  of  the  net  that  was  cast  into  the 
sea,  refers  to  the  kingdom  of  Christ  especially  in  the  last 
days  and  at  the  time  of  the  second  advent.  The  letter  to 
Laodicea  depicts  the  conditions  that  will  obtain  during  the 
period  immediately  preceding  the  judgment  period.  We 
may  already  have  entered  this  period  of  democracy,  mob 
rule  and  lukewarmness  in  religion.  But  the  periods  over- 
lap one  another.  These  parables  and  letters  portray  the 
kingdom  of  Christ  during  every  period  between  the  first 
and  second  advents  of  Christ,  while  special  periods  are  spe- 
cially characterized,  as  we  have  sought  briefly  to  point  out. 
Christ  reigns  during  all  of  these  periods,  and  although  in- 
visible, still  we  experience  dynamically  His  presence  and 
activity.  Just  as  God  through  the  Son  led  the  Children  of 
Israel  through  the  wilderness  to  the  promised  land,  so  the 
Lord  leads  His  children  to  the  appointed  goal. 

The  form  or  the  character  of  the  government  in  the  king- 
dom of  Christ  on  earth  is  grace  and  truth.  Compare  John 
1 :  17.  In  accordance  herewith  Christ  reigns  pneumato- 
crat;cally  through  the  means  of  grace.  The  Holy  Spirit 
proceeds  from  the  Father  and  the  Son  and  works  through 
the  means  of  grace.  Through  the  means  of  grace  men  be- 
come citizens  or  subjects  in  the  kingdom  and  through  these 
the  kingdom  is  built  up  and  wins  its  victories.  While  the 
dominion  of  Christ  is  mediated  in  this  way,  still  He  has  not 
withdrawn  His  presence  from  the  kingdom.  In  the  begin- 
ning He  exerted  His  influence  by  His  immediate  presence, 
now  He  also  intervenes  in  the  development  of  His  kingdom 
through  His  personal  activity.  Among  Scripture  passages 
may  be  cited  the  following:  "When  he,  the  Spirit  of  truth, 
is  come,  he  shall   guide  you   in   all   the  truth.     He   shall 


THE   REGAL   OFFICE   OF    CHRIST.  291 

glorify  me :  for  he  shall  take  of  mine,  and  shall  declare  it 
unto  you"  (John  16:  13,  14)  ;  "I  shall  not  leave  you  desolate: 
I  shall  come  unto  you"  (John  14:  18)  ;  "And  they  went 
forth,  and  preached  everywhere,  the  Lord  working  with 
them,  and  confirming  the  word  by  the  signs  that  followed" 
(Mark  16:  20)  ;  "Where  two  or  three  are  gathered  together 
in  my  name,  there  am  I  in  the  midst  of  them"  (Matt.  18: 
20).  Compare  also  concerning  the  conversion  of  Saul  in 
Acts  9:  4—6;  also  Acts  18:  9—11;  22:  17—21;  "And  he 
is  the  head  of  the  body,  the  church"  (Col.  1:  18)  ;  "For  he 
must  reign,  till  he  hath  put  all  his  enemies  under  his  feet" 
(1  Cor.  15:  25). 

The  subjects  in  this  kingdom  are  all  true  Christians,  al- 
though nominal  Christians  are  also  counted.  There  are 
tares  among  the  wheat,  and  branches  in  the  vine  that  do 
not  bear  fruit.  The  kingdom  is  also  built  up  inwardly,  so 
that  it  often  happens  that  nominal  Christians  become  true 
subjects  in  the  kingdom  of  Christ.  The  subjects  are  called 
a  royal  priesthood  and  constitute  the  kingdom  of  Christ. 
They  shall  reign  with  Him  in  His  glory.  Christ  said  to  His 
disciples :  "And  I  appoint  unto  you  a  kingdom,  even  as  my 
Father  appointed  unto  me"  (Luke  22:  29,  30;  cf.  Rev.  3: 
21). 

The  object  of  the  kingdom  of  grace  is  the  salvation  of 
men,  and  that  the  elect  congregation  shall  in  the  consum- 
mation constitute  the  eternal  kingdom  of  glory,  through 
which  God  shall  be  glorified  and  the  original  plan  of  salva- 
tion in  regard  to  man  carried  through  to  fruition. 

3)  Regnum  justitise.  The  old  Dogmaticians  conceived  of 
the  significance  of  this  kingdom  in  a  narrow  way  and  said 
that  it  was  the  dominion  of  Christ  over  the  evil  angels  and 
men,  or  the  damned  (in  angelos  malos  et  homines  dam- 
natos) .  But  we  may  conceive  of  this  kingdom  as  a  kingdom 
of  justice  in  a  more  general  sense  and  consider  it  as  a  part 
of  the  dominion  of  Christ  that  constitutes  a  mediation  be- 
tween the  kingdom  of  grace  and  the  kingdom  of  glory. 
Christ  is  not  simply  the  King  of  grace,  He  is  also  the  King 
of  justice.  He  is  not  only  the  thorn-crowned  King,  He  like- 
wise wears  a  bejewelled  crown  of  glory.    According  to  Rev. 


292  SOTERIOLOGY. 

19:  11 — 16  Christ  shall  judge  and  smite  the  nations  with 
justice,  He  shall  rule  them  with  a  rod  of  iron.  The  judg- 
ment shall  begin  at  the  house  of  God  and  then  continue. 
According  to  Rev.  2 :  26,  27  and  other  passages  the  faithful 
shall  also  in  some  way  participate  in  the  reign  of  justice. 

4)  Recjninn  glorix.  By  this  is  meant  the  dominion  of 
Christ  in  the  Church  triumphant  especially  after  the  judg- 
ment of  the  world.  The  members  of  this  kingdom  are  both 
the  good  angels  and  the  glorified  children  of  men.  Christ 
shall  reign  in  this  kingdom  as  the  Second  Person  in  the 
(iodhead  in  all  eternity.  Christ  rules  now  in  the  kingdom 
of  the  heavens.  But  Christ  shall  come  again ;  the  dead  in 
Christ  shall  rise  first,  and  the  living  shall  be  changed. 
When  the  Son  of  man  shall  come  in  His  glory,  and  shall  sit 
upon  the  throne  of  His  glory,  and  when  the  dead  shall  arise, 
then  shall  the  kingdom  of  God  be  made  fully  manifest. 
Then  the  prophecies  concerning  the  kingdom  shall  be  ful- 
filled and  in  a  divine  way  Christ  shall  reign  as  the  King  of 
glory  over  the  eternally  blessed  inhabitants  in  the  new 
creation. 

As  the  King  of  glory  the  following  attributes  are  ascribed 
to  Christ:  1)  Universalis,  which  term  does  not  conflict  with 
the  fact  that  the  Father  is  also  the  King  in  this  sense.  The 
Triune  God  is  King  in  the  absolute  sense,  but  special  men- 
tion is  here  made  of  the  Second  Person  in  the  Godhead. 
The  Scriptures  make  this  distinction,  as  we  note  in  Rev. 
11 :  15,  17 :  ''The  kingdom  of  the  world  has  become  the  king- 
dom of  our  Lord  and  of  his  Christ :  and  he  shall  reign  for 
ever  and  ever.  We  give  thee  thanks,  O  Lord  God,  the  Al- 
mighty, who  art  and  who  wast;  because  thou  hast  taken 
thy  great  power,  and  didst  reign."  2)  Fraternus,  since  His 
dominion  is  fraternal  in  the  sense  that  He  who  is  the  first- 
born among  many  brethren  does  not  reign  alone,  inasmuch 
as  the  Scriptures  declare  that  the  redeemed  shall  reign  with 
Christ,  as  we  read  in  Rev.  22 :  5 :  "They  shall  reign  for  ever 
and  ever."  3)  GloHosus,  inasmuch  as  His  dominion  shall 
be  glorious  and  surpass  all  human  expectation.  Compare 
1  Cor.  2:  8,  9.  The  Lord  is  called  "the  King  of  glory"  (Ps. 
24:  7—10). 


V.     PNEUMATOLOGY 


Pneumatology  constitutes  that  part  of  Dogmatics  which 
treats  of  the  application  of  the  grace  of  salvation  through 
the  Holy  Ghost  together  with  the  order  of  salvation,  or 
ordo  salutis.  The  connection  between  Soteriology  and  Pneu- 
matology consists  in  this,  that  the  former  is  the  foundation 
of  the  latter,  while  the  Holy  Ghost  applies  the  salvation  in 
Christ  upon  the  heart  of  the  individual.  The  objective 
reconciliation  becomes  subjective  when  the  individual 
through  the  grace  of  the  Spirit  hearkens  unto  the  words 
of  reconciliation:  ''Be  ye  reconciled  to  God." 

The  sending  of  the  Holy  Ghost  was  dependent  on  the 
death,  the  resurrection  and  tfte  ascension  of  Christ.  Easter 
was  the  causa  that  brought  forth  Pentecost  as  the  effectus. 
Christ  said :  "Nevertheless  I  tell  you  the  truth :  It  is  ex- 
pedient for  you  that  I  go  away;  for  if  I  go  not  away,  the 
Comforter  will  not  come  unto  you ;  but  if  I  go,  I  will  send 
him  unto  you"  (John  16:  7).  The  Holy  Ghost  is,  therefore, 
the  divine  representative  who  mediates  the  work  of  salva- 
tion in  the  world.  The  pneumatological  activity  is  therefore 
necessary  as  the  soteriological  work  was  necessary.  The 
third  article  of  the  Creed  follows  in  necessary  sequence 
upon  the  second.  Both  of  these  articles  must  receive  equal 
emphasis,  indeed,  all  three  articles  of  the  Creed  must  re- 
ceive equal  emphasis,  inasmuch  as  they  constitute  a  unity 
in  the  threefold  confession  corresponding  to  the  divine 
Trinity. 

By  the  sending  of  the  Holy  Ghost  we  are  not  to  under- 
stand that  He  had  been  inactive  before  in  relation  to  men, 
because  He  was  active  during  the  Old  Testament  dispensa- 
tion and  in  a  sense  also  among  all  men.    The  question  con- 


294  I'NKlMATOr.OGV. 

cerns  the  sending  of  the  Holy  Ghost  in  a  special  sense.  In 
John  7:  39  we  read:  "But  this  spake  he  of  the  Spirit,  which 
they  that  believed  on  him  were  to  receive:  for  the  Spirit 
M'as  not  yet  given ;  because  Jesus  was  not  yet  glorified."  In 
the  Greek  text  it  is  stated  that  the  Spirit  was  not  yet,  i.  e.. 
He  had  not  as  yet  entered  into  His  New  Testament  office. 
Before  the  glorification  of  Jesus  He  could  not  unite  the 
children  of  men  as  constituting  a  mystical  body  with  Christ 
as  the  head.  Godet  says :  "Before  Pentecost  the  Holy  Spirit 
had  influenced  men  both  in  the  Old  Testament  and  in  the 
circle  of  His  disciples,  but  as  yet  He  was  not  present  as 
their  possession  and  their  personal  life."  In  the  Old  Testa- 
ment the  Spirit  worked  more  from  without,  while  in  the 
New  Testament  He  works  from  within.  As  the  Son  of  God 
in  the  New  Testament  came  very  near  to  the  children  of 
men  and  became  one  of  the  race,  so  the  Third  Person  of  the 
Trinity  has  also  come  very  near  to  men  and  dwells  in  the 
hearts  of  the  faithful.  Likewise  the  Father  has  entered 
into  close  communion  with  men,  a  mystery  which  is  ex- 
pressed in  the  mystical  union. 

Pentecost  denotes  a  new  period  of  creation.  The  Holy 
Ghost  has  always  been  active  in  creative  epochs.  When  the 
world  was  created  the  Holy  Ghost  was  active  in  a  formative 
way.  He  was  also  active  in  a  special  way  at  the  incarna- 
tion. Through  the  activity  of  the  Spirit  on  the  day  of  Pen- 
tecost the  Church  of  Christ  was  established,  so  that  Pente- 
cost became  the  birthday  of  the  Church,  and  in  like  manner 
wherever  the  Holy  Ghost  is  permitted  to  perform  His  work 
in  the  heart  of  the  individual,  there  the  result  will  be  a  new 
creation.  The  Holy  Ghost  is  active  in  the  Church  through 
the  means  of  grace,  through  which  the  believers  become 
the  temples  of  the  Holy  Ghost.  IREN^US  says:  "Where- 
soever the  Church  is,  there  is  the  Holy  Ghost,  and  whereso- 
ever the  Holy  Ghost  is,  there  is  the  Church  and  every 
species  of  grace."* 

The  Rationalists  and  others  denied  the  existence  of  the 
Holy  Ghost,  at  least  His  personal  presence  and  activity. 

♦  Irenaeus  against  Heresies,  III,  xxiv. 


GUACE    AND    TlIK   OHDEK   OF    SALVATION.  295 

The  same  arguments  are  advanced  as  are  used  generally 
against  the  special  divine  revelation.  They  declare  that 
there  are  no  reliable  proofs  of  the  personal  presence  and 
activity  of  the  Holy  Ghost  in  the  Church.  J.  D.  Michaelis 
declared  openly  that  he  had  never  experienced  the  testimony 
of  the  Holy  Spirit.  But  all  true  Christians  can  testify  that 
the  testimony  of  the  Spirit  is  true  and  real.  The  words  of 
the  Lord  in  Rom.  8:  16  are  verified  in  the  life  of  every 
Christian :  "The  Spirit  himself  beareth  witness  with  our 
spirit,  that  we  are  the  children  of  God." 

Dogmaticians  ascribe  a  fourfold  office  to  the  Holy  Ghost, 
but  care  must  be  taken  that  the  distinctions  in  these  offices 
be  not  over-em.phasized  to  such  a  degree  that  the  unity  be 
obscured,  since  the  distinctions  depend  upon  the  varying 
subjective  states  of  man.  These  offices  are  the  following: 
1)  officium  elenchticuni ,  which  is  the  office  of  the  Holy 
Ghost  through  which  the  sinner  is  so  influenced  as  to  be- 
come conscious  of  sin;  2)  offidum  didascalicum  is  the  office 
through  which  knowledge  of  the  way  of  salvation  is  im- 
parted; 3)  officium  pxdeuticum,  or  that  activity  of  the  Holy 
Ghost  through  which  the  converting  grace  of  God  works 
true  penitence  and  living  faith ;  4)  officium  paracleticum,  or 
the  office  through  which  the  converted  soul  is  guided,  ad- 
monished and  comforted  in  the  varied  experiences  of  life 
until  the  goal  of  glory  is  reached.  Compare  the  following 
Scripture  passages:  John  16:  8;  14:  26;  16:  13—15;  2  Tim. 
3:  16;  Heb.  12:  1—13;  Rom.  8:  16,  26.  Also  compare  Lu- 
ther's explanation  of  the  third  article  of  the  Apostles'  Creed. 

§23.  THE  GRACE  OF  THE  HOLY  GHOST  AND  THE 
ORDER  OF  SALVATION. 

The  special  grace  of  the  Holy  Spirit,  in  like  manner  as 
the  saving  grace  of  God  in  general,  denotes  the  good  will 
of  God  toward  man  at  the  same  time  as  it  excludes  entirely 
all  human  merit.  The  word  x"-P'-'^  originally  meant  that 
which  affords  joy,  pleasure,  delight,  and  was  used  by  the 
Greeks  to  express  beauty,  charm,  loveliness.     The  word  is 


296  I'.NEL-.MATOI.OGY. 

SO  used  in  the  Septuagint.  Later,  however,  the  word  was 
used  to  denote  the  thing  as  realized.  Aristotle  used  the 
word  to  mean  a  free  gift,  the  giver  expecting  nothing  in 
return.  In  the  New  Testament  the  word  has  received  its 
full  and  consecrated  significance  to  express  the  lovingkind- 
ness,  favor  and  good-will  of  God  toward  sinners.  The  ex- 
pression tAeo?  has  also  undergone  a  change  in  meaning  from 
what  it  had  among  the  classical  writers.  It  means  that 
the  mercy  of  God  is  made  manifest  toward  the  wretched. 
Bengel  makes  the  following  distinction  between  gratia  and 
misericordia :  "Gratia  tollit  culpam,  misericordia  miseriam." 

1.  The  Definition  of  the  Grace  of  God  and  its  Division. 

HoLLAZius  defines  gratia  Spiritus  sancti  applicatrix 
as  follows:  "The  applying  grace  of  God  is  the  source  of  those 
divine  acts  by  which  the  Holy  Ghost  by  means  of  the  Word 
of  God  and  the  Sacraments  dispenses,  offers  to  us,  confers 
and  seals  those  favors  that  tvere  designed  for  man  through 
the  great  good-will  of  God  the  Father  and  procured  by  the 
fraternal  redemption  of  Jesus  Christ."  * 

Gratia  has  been  defined  in  divers  ways.  Quenstedt 
makes  use  of  the  following  division :  a)  gratia  assistens, 
which  acts  exterior  to  man,  corresponding  to  prevenient  or 
preparatory  grace;  b)  gratia  ingrediens,  corresponding  to 
operating  grace ;  c)  gratia  inhahitans,  or  indwelling  grace, 
corresponding  to  co-operating  grace.  However,  the  ordi- 
nary division  is  as  follows:  gratia  prxvcniens,  prxparans, 
opcra7is  et  co-operans,  while  sometimes  gratia  conservans 
is  added.  Hollazius  defines  as  follows:**  gratia  prove- 
niens, or  prevenient  grace,  is  the  act  of  grace  by  which  the 
Holy  Spirit  through  the  Word  of  God  off"ers  to  man,  dead  in 
trespasses  and  sins,  the  good-will  of  the  Father  and  the 
merit   of   Christ,    removes    the   natural    inability,    invites. 

*  HoM.AZiis:  "Gratia  Spiritus  sancti  applicatrix  est  principium  illo- 
runi  actuum  divinorum,  quibus  Sp.  s.  per  verbuiii  Dei  et  sacramenta 
heneficia  spiritual ia  et  ceterna,  benignissima  Dei  patris  benevolentia 
luimano  generi  dcstinata  et  fraterna  J.  Christi  redemtione  acquisita 
disponsat  nobisquc  offert,  confert  ot  obsignat." 

**  IIoll.  Exam.  Theol.  Acroam.     Pars  HI.  §1,  Cap.  iv.  p.  230. 


GRACE   AND  THE  ORDER  OF   SAI>VATION.  297 

arouses,  urges  and  continues  to  urge  him  to  repent;  2) 
gratia  Tprseimrans,  or  preparatory  grace,  is  the  act  of  grace 
through  which  the  Holy  Ghost  removes  the  natural  and  ac- 
tual opposition,  makes  the  will  penitent  through  the  Law 
and  pours  into  the  heart  the  knowledge  of  the  gospel  teach- 
ing, so  that  the  penitent  may  be  prepared  to  accept  the 
saving  faith;  3)  gratia  operans  is  the  act  of  grace  through 
which  the  Holy  Spirit  imparts  the  powers  of  faith,  when 
justifying  faith  is  brought  about.  To  this  division  belong 
justification,  regeneration  and  the  mystical  union;  4)  gratia 
co-operans  is  the  act  of  grace  through  which  the  Holy  Spirit 
co-operates  with  the  justified  man  in  order  to  promote  sanc- 
tification  and  the  doing  of  good  works ;  5)  gratia  conservans 
is  the  act  of  grace  through  which  faith  and  holiness  of  life 
are  sustained  and  illumined  to  the  end  that  the  faithful  may 
persevere  steadfastly  even  unto  death, 

2.    The  Attributive  Terms  Applied  to  Grace. 

The  following  distinguishing  epithets  or  attributive  terms 
are  applied  to  grace:  1)  supernaturalis ;  "The  grace  of  the 
Lord  Jesus  Christ  be  with  you"  (1  Cor.  16:  23;  cf.  Titus  2: 
11)  ;  2)  medicinalis;  "Oh  save  me  according  to  thy  loving- 
kindness"  (Ps.  109:  21—26;  cf.  2  Cor.  12:  9)  ;  3)  salutaris; 
"The  grace  of  God  hath  appeared,  bringing  salvation  to  all 
men"  (Titus  2:  11)  ;  4)  forensis;  "Justified  by  his  grace" 
(Titus  3:7);  5)  seria;  "Receive  not  the  grace  of  God  in 
vain"  (2  Cor.  6:  1;  cf.  Isa.  55;  1  Tim.  1:  15)  ;  6)  sufficiens; 
"Where  sin  abounded,  grace  did  abound  more  exceedingly" 
(Rom.  5:  20)  ;  7)  generalis;  "For  of  his  fulness  have  we 
all  received,  and  grace  for  grace"  (John  1:  16)  ;  8)  libera; 
"By  grace  have  ye  been  saved  through  faith;  and  that  not 
of  yourselves,  it  is  the  gift  of  God"  (Eph.  2:8);  9)  resisti- 
bilis;  "And  ye  would  not"  (Matt.  23:  37)  ;  "Looking  care- 
fully lest  there  be  any  man  that  falleth  short  of  the  grace 
of  God"  (Heb.  12:  15;  cf.  2  Cor.  6:1;  Jude,  verse  4).  In 
a  sense  we  may  say  that  although  grace  is  resistibilis ,  still 
it  is  inevitabilis  or  inevitable,  since  when  man  comes  in 


298  rxET'AiATOi.or.Y. 

contact  with  the  means  of  grace,  he  cannot  hinder  its  activ- 
ity as  an  exterior  power  of  God.  Sometimes  the  term 
amissibilw,  or  that  which  may  be  lost,  is  used.  The  terms 
generalis,  seria  and  resistibilis  are  used  against  the  Cal- 
vinists,  who  teach  that  grace  is  only  for  the  elect,  and  as 
such  is  irresistible. 

3.  Ordo  Salutis  or  the  Order  of  Salvation. 
Neither  the  old  nor  the  more  modern  Dogmaticians  fol- 
low a  common  order  in  the  doctrine  of  ordo  salutis,  indeed, 
great  differences  prevail.  H.  Schmid,  who  in  general  fol- 
lows the  old  Dogmaticians,  presents  the  doctrine  in  the 
following  order:  Faith,  Justification,  Vocation,  Illumina- 
tion, Regeneration  and  Conversion,  the  Mystical  Union, 
Renovation,  Sanctification  and  Good  Works.  Baier  places 
de  regeneratione  et  conversione  between  de  fide  and  de 
justificatione.  Hollazius  uses  the  following  order:  De 
vocatione,  de  illuminatione,  de  conversione,  de  regeneratione, 
de  justificatione,  de  unione  mystica,  de  renovatione,  de  con- 
servatione  et  de  glorificatione.  The  following  order  is  used 
in  Hase's  Hutterus  Redivivus:  first  fides  et  justificatio, 
then  vocatio,  illuminatio,  conversio,  sanctificatio  et  unio 
mystica.  Luthardt  makes  use  of  the  following  order: 
Vocation,  Illumination,  Conversion,  Penitence,  Faith,  Justi- 
fication, Regeneration,  the  Mystical  Union,  Sanctification: 
renovatio,  sanctificatio  et  bona  opera.  Some  Dogmaticians 
treat  justification  first,  before  the  order  of  salvation,  strict- 
ly speaking,  because  it  constitutes  a  judicial  act  on  the  part 
of  God.  Regeneration  is  placed  before  justification  when 
the  latter  is  arranged  in  the  order  of  salvation,  because 
regeneration  is  conceived  of  as  the  genesis  of  faith.  As 
may  also  be  observed  from  the  examples  cited  concerning 
the  order  of  salvation,  some  Dogmaticians  treat  regenera- 
tion before  conversion.  The  reason  of  this  is  that  regenera- 
tion is  conceived  of  as  standing  in  connection  with  Baptism, 
while  conversion  takes  place  subsequently,  in  case  the  bap- 
tized and  regenerated  person  should  fall  from  the  grace  of 
Baptism.     This  order  is  also  followed  on  the  ground  that 


GRACE   AXD   THE   ORDER   OF   SALVATION.  299 

regeneration  sets  forth  the  divine  side  of  the  work  of  the 
appropriation  of  salvation,  while  conversion  presents  the 
human  side.  In  such  case  regeneration  corresponds  to  con- 
versio  transitiva. 

In  dealing  with  the  order  of  salvation  we  must  remember 
that  the  treatment  will  be  different  as  we  deal  with  it  from 
the  standpoint  of  infant  Baptism  or  the  Baptism  of  prose- 
lytes. Here  the  question  concerns  chiefly  the  order  of  sal- 
vation within  the  Church,  where  infant  Baptism  is  mostly 
used.  Since  regeneration  takes  place  in  Baptism,  and  since 
Baptism  is  the  sacrament  of  regeneration,  therefore  some 
have  questioned  the  possibility  of  both  conversion  and  regen- 
eration in  the  adult  who  has  fallen  from  the  grace  of  Baptism 
and  afterwards  been  restored.  The  observation  has  been 
made  that  analogous  to  the  natural  birth  spiritual  birth 
ought  to  take  place  but  once,  and  that  the  return  of  the 
sinner  to  the  grace  of  Baptism  ought  to  be  termed  a  re- 
awakening and  conversion.  In  this  manner  the  presenta- 
tion of  the  order  of  salvation  would  indeed  be  simplified, 
but  it  must  be  stated  that  the  analogy  of  the  natural  birth 
is  not  an  adequate  one.  If  regeneration  takes  place  but 
once,  then  we  must  consider  the  state  of  the  backslider  as 
a  state  of  sleep  and  not  one  of  spiritual  death.  The  Scrip- 
tures do  not  solve  this  problem  so  far  as  the  terminology  is 
concerned,  but  the  following  passages,  nevertheless,  throw 
an  indirect  light  on  the  question  at  issue :  "This  thy  brother 
was  dead,  and  is  alive  again"  (Luke  15:  32)  ;  "Having  been 
begotten  again,  not  of  corruptible  seed,  but  of  incorruptible, 
through  the  word  of  God"  (1  Peter  1:  23)  "He  brought  us 
forth  by  the  word  of  truth"  (James  1 :  18  ;  cf.  John  3  :  3 — 5) . 
Some  Dogmaticians  speak  therefore  of  an  objective  and 
principal  regeneration  in  Baptism  and  afterwards  of  a  sub- 
jective regeneration  through  the  regenerating  power  of  the 
Word,  when  man  again  receives  the  spiritual  life  which  he 
first  received  in  Baptism,  and  now  experiences  in  a  con- 
scious and  personal  way.  It  ought  also  to  be  noted  that  the 
presentation  of  ordo  salutis  is  dependent  on  the  definition 
of  regeneration,  as  to  whether  it  is  simply  donatio  fidei  or 


300  PXEUMATOLOGY. 

the  spiritual  life  itself  and  the  adoption  as  the  children  of 
God.  In  the  solution  of  this  problem  we  must  bear  in  mind 
that  the  doctrine  of  "justification  by  faith  alone"  occupies 
a  dominating  and  regulative  position  in  the  doctrines  of  the 
Lutheran  Church,  that  this  doctrine  constitutes  the  material 
principle  and  in  the  doctrinal  system  stands  primus  et  prin- 
cipalis articulus.  Therefore  it  would  seem  to  accord  most 
closely  with  conservative  and  historical  Lutheranism  to 
place  justification  before  regeneration  in  the  order  of  salva- 
tion, justification  taking  place  in  the  mind  of  God  as  cause 
and  regeneration  in  the  heart  of  man  as  effect.  It  may  in- 
deed be  said  that  justification  and  regeneration  occur  simul- 
taneously, but  in  reality,  and  for  the  sake  of  the  logical 
sequence,  one  or  the  other  must  be  placed  first. 

All  the  different  acts  that  enter  into  the  order  of  salva- 
tion are  set  forth  in  the  Word  of  God,  and  Dogmaticians 
usually  refer  to  Acts  26 :  17,  18,  because  this  passage  seems 
to  include  the  whole  order.  We  quote  this  passage,  indi- 
cating the  act  involved:  "Unto  whom  I  send  thee  (voca- 
tion) ,  to  open  their  eyes  (illumination) ,  that  they  may  turn 
from  darkness  to  light  and  from  the  power  of  Satan  to  God 
(conversion),  that  they  may  receive  remission  of  sins  (jus- 
tification) and  an  inheritance  (regeneration)  among  them 
that  are  sanctified  (renovation  and  sanctification) ."  We 
shall  present  the  different  acts  or  grades  in  ordo  salutis  in 
the  following  order:  Vocatio  (et  excitatio),  illuminatio,  con- 
versio  (contritio  et  fides),  justificatio,  regeneratio,  unio 
mystica,  renovatio  (renovatio,  sanctificatio  et  bona  opera) 
et  conservatio. 

While  the  acts  of  grace  in  the  order  of  salvation  cannot 
always  be  definitely  fixed  as  to  time,  although  each  has  its 
own  time,  still  they  occur  in  order,  and  each  act  is  experi- 
enced in  its  principal  features.  The  applying  grace  is  pres- 
ent from  the  beginning,  but  can  only  gradually  accomplish 
that  which  corresponds  to  the  state  of  the  individual.  No 
act  of  grace  is  ever  entirely  completed,  since  by  reason  of 
sin  man  always  stands  in  need  of  all  the  acts  of  grace. 
However,  there  is  a  special  time  when  man  is  called,  en- 


VOCATION.  301 

lightened,  etc.,  so  that  the  ordo  salutis  is  a  truth  which  is 
grounded  in  the  Scriptures  and  which  is  demonstrated  in 
the  subjective  experience.  We  may  say  that  illumination 
occupies  a  peculiar  position  in  ordo  salutis,  since  it  is  an 
act  of  grace  through  which  the  other  acts  are  mediated, 
because  of  the  fact  that  it  stands  in  immediate  connection 
with  the  Word  of  God,  through  which  the  Holy  Spirit 
works.  For  this  reason  we  may  say  that  illumination  occu- 
pies a  special  place  after  vocation,  but  in  general  occupies 
a  mediating  position  in  the  entire  order  of  salvation. 

§24.    VOCATION. 

The  Holy  Ghost  begins  His  work  of  applying  the  grace 
of  salvation  through  vocation.  The  expression  vocatio,  or 
the  call,  may  be  understood  in  so  broad  a  sense  as  to  include 
the  children  at  Baptism,  who  may  be  said  to  be  the  objects 
of  the  calling  and  regenerating  grace  of  God,  or  to  be  influ- 
enced at  once  by  gratia  prseveniens,  prseparans  et  operans, 
but,  strictly  speaking,  those  persons  are  the  objects  of  the 
calling  activity  of  the  Holy  Ghost  who  are  conscious  of  the 
call  through  the  Word  of  God.  Therefore  the  calling  grace 
of  God  is  operative  both  within  and  outside  the  Church 
through  the  hearing  and  reading  of  the  Word  of  God.  Even 
those  children  who  have  remained  faithful  to  the  grace  of 
Baptism  must  in  a  certain  sense  experience  the  call,  since 
the  demands  of  their  personal  self-consciousness  and  self- 
determination  require  that  they  in  a  self-conscious  and  self- 
determined  way  learn  of  their  blessed  state  and  abide  in  it. 
While  it  is  true  that  the  gracious  work  of  the  Spirit  in  rela- 
tion to  such  persons  belongs  principally  to  the  province  of 
sanctification,  still  to  a  greater  or  less  degree  they  also  ex- 
perience the  leading  acts  in  the  order  of  salvation,  since  all 
Christians  must  live  in  daily  penitence  and  must  daily  re- 
pair to  the  throne  of  grace.  The  definition  of  vocation, 
however,  in  relation  to  the  members  of  the  Church,  has 
reference,  strictly  speaking,  to  such  as  have  to  a  greater 
or  less  extent  fallen  from  the  grace  of  Baptism. 


302  i'NKi'.\rATOi,0(;Y. 

The  following  definition  is  taken  partly  from  HOLLAZius : 
VOCATIO  is  the  act  of  grace  whereby  the  Holy  Spirit  mani- 
fests to  those  icithout  the  Church  of  Christ  cr  not  tnie  mem- 
bers of  it  through  the  Word  of  God  His  ivill  to  save,  and 
offers  them  the  gracious  benefits  of  Christ's  redemption,  so 
that  they  may  become  vitally  coyinected  with  the  Church 
through  Baptism  or  conversion  and  obtain  eternal  salvation. 

The  causa  impulsiva  interim  of  the  call  is  the  goodness 
and  mercy  of  God  on  the  ground  of  the  merit  of  Christ,  and 
causa  externa  is  the  profound  misery  of  man  and  the  need 
of  salvation. 

1.    The  Division  of  the  Call. 

The  Call  is  divided  as  follows:  1)  generalis,  indirecta 
sen  psedagogica,  by  which  is  meant  the  general  call,  medi- 
ated through  the  conscience,  nature  and  the  world  dominion 
of  God.  This  general  call  is  made  operative  in  three  ways : 
a)  objective,  through  the  natural  revelation  in  the  mani- 
festation of  the  divine  beneficence  toward  all  creatures  and 
in  the  divine  government  of  the  world ;  b)  effective,  through 
the  efficacious  divine  influence  and  impulse,  by  which,  both 
from  the  theoretic  and  practical  innate  notions,  and  by 
reason  of  proofs  of  the  divine  benignity,  practical  conclu- 
sions are  produced  in  the  minds  of  unbelievers  to  inquire 
concerning  the  true  worship  of  God ;  c)  cumidative,  through 
the  report  concerning  the  Church  spread  over  the  world. 
Compare  Rom.  1:  19,  20;  2:  14,  15;  Acts  17:  25—28;  1 
Thess.  1:8;  Acts  14:  17;  2)  specialis  seu  directa,  or  the 
special  call  which  is  based  on  the  special  revelation  and  is 
mediated  through  the  Word  of  God.  This  special  call  has 
the  following  subdivisions:  a)  ordinaHa  seu  mediata,  by 
which  is  meant  that  as  a  rule  God  calls  mediately;  b)  extra- 
ordinaria  seu  immediata,  by  which  is  meant  an  extraordi- 
nary or  immediate  call,  which  sometimes  occurred  in  the 
Old  Testament  dispensation  and  in  the  beginning  of  the 
New  Testament;  c)  solcmni^  et  minus  solemnis, — in  the 
former  case  when  the  call  comes  to  a  person  during  the 
preaching  of  the  Word  at  a  church  service, — in  the  latter 


VOCATION.  303 

case  when  the  call  is  received  during  private  devotions; 
d)  externa  et  mterna,  or  the  external  and  internal  call. 
This  distinction  has  arisen  on  account  of  the  Calvinists. 
The  Lutheran  Church  acknowledges  that  the  distinction  can 
be  made  in  a  formal  sense,  but  it  is  not  a  relationship  of 
logical  contraries ;  in  a  material  sense  it  is  the  same  call. 
In  accordance  with  their  doctrine  of  predestination  the 
Calvinists   present  the   distinction   in   the   following   way : 

1)  ratione  principiorum,  or  in  reference  to  their  origin, — 
vocatio  externa  being  made  through  the  ministry  of  the 
Word  to  the  many, — vocatio  interna,  through  the  illumi- 
nating work  of  the  Holy  Spirit  in  the  hearts  of  the  elect; 

2)  ratione  suhjectomim,  or  in  reference  to  their  subjects, 
so  that  the  former  call  is  designed  for  all,  the  latter  call 
only  for  the  elect;  3)  r^atione  efficacise,  or  in  reference  to 
the  efficacy,  so  that  the  latter  only  is  efficacious  and  irre- 
sistible. 

2.    The  Means  and  Mode  of  the  Call. 

The  Holy  Ghost  calls  regularly  through  the  Word  of  God 
in  the  ordinary  sense  and  also  through  the  Word  in  the 
Sacraments.  Hollazius*  says :  "God  calls  poor  sinners 
directly  and  savingly  to  the  Church  by  the  Gospel  (2  Thess. 
2 :  14) ,  to  which  Baptism  also  pertains  (John  3:5).  Never- 
theless the  divine  Law  contributes  something  to  the  call  of 
sinners,  but  only  indirectly,  negatively  and  accidentally." 
The  Gospel  is  not  to  be  interpreted  here  in  its  narrow  sense 
but  in  its  entirety.  The  call  is  experienced  as  an  invitation 
and  at  times  as  a  warning  and  a  rebuke  in  order  to  arouse 
sinners.  It  may  be  brought  about  by  a  special  Scripture 
passage  or  word  that  has  caught  the  ear  in  hearing  or  the 
eye  in  reading  the  Word,  or  it  may  be  that  such  a  word  is 
recalled  in  memory  in  the  hour  of  silent  meditation.  These 
are  moments  of  visitation  for  man,  and  he  is  unable  to  hin- 
der the  prevenient  grace  from  exercising  its  influence. 
Such  times  of  visitation  are  indeed  critical,  since  the  ques- 
tion is  as  to  whether  man  will  oppose  the  grace  of  God,  or 

*  Exam.  Theol.  Acroam.    Pars  III,  §1,  Cap.  iv,  p.  242. 


304  PNEUJrATOLOGY. 

whether  he  will  enter  into  a  passive  state  and  permit  the 
Holy  Spirit  to  continue  the  work  of  grace.  Such  times  of 
visitation  may  occur  often.  The  experience  of  the  call  to 
repentance  is  in  principle  the  same  for  all,  but  the  external 
manner  in  which  attention  is  directed  to  the  significance  of 
the  call  may  vary  with  a  variety  of  experiences  and  condi- 
tions. We  might  call  to  mind  the  instances  of  Paul,  the 
jailor  at  Philippi,  Augustine  and  Luther,  noting  that  while 
different  conditions  surrounded  them,  the  call  was  the  same. 

3.  The  Attributes  of  Vocation. 
The  following  attributes  are  ascribed  to  vocation :  1)  uni- 
versalis, or  that  the  call  is  universal.  This  term  is  used 
against  the  Calvinists,  who  teach  that  the  call,  strictly 
speaking,  is  merely  intended  for  the  elect.  But  we  teach 
that  the  call  is  intended  for  all.  The  special  call  reaches 
all  within  the  Church  and  many  outside  of  the  Church 
through  missionary  activities.  The  old  Dogmaticians  en- 
deavored to  prove  that  the  call  had  gone  forth  into  the 
world  three  times,  namely,  at  the  time  of  Adam,  of  Enoch 
and  Noah,  and  in  the  Apostolic  period.  This  contention 
may  be  true  with  regard  to  the  first  two  periods,  but  not 
with  regard  to  the  last  named.  Hutterus,  Gerhard,  Quen- 
stedt  and  Hollazius  declare  that  the  nations  themselves  are 
to  blame  because  they  do  not  as  yet  belong  to  the  Church 
of  Christ,  since  they  despise  or  are  indifferent  toward  the 
Christian  teaching  which  they  must  know  by  report.  They 
neglect  to  seek  knowledge  concerning  the  worship  of  the 
true  God,  although  the  general  natural  call  ought  to  prove 
a  suflftcient  incentive  to  that  end.  It  is  also  objected  that 
the  children  ought  not  to  suffer  for  the  transgressions  of 
their  fathers,  to  which  the  old  Dogmaticians  answer  that 
while  the  children  are  born  outside  the  Church,  which  is  a 
temporary  punishment,  still  they  are  not  on  that  account 
barred  from  entering  into  connection  with  the  Church, 
which  occupies  a  prominent  place  in  the  world  and  is  not 
unknown.  In  this  connection  it  may  be  remarked  that  the 
Church  has  not  been  as  faithful  as  it  should  have  been  in 


VOCATIOX.  305 

relation  to  foreign  mission  work,  for  if  the  mission  work 
had  been  carried  on  energetically,  then  it  would  seem  that 
the  whole  world  long  ere  this  would  be  Christian,  at  least 
in  a  nominal  sense.  But  even  when  all  the  nations  shall 
have  received  the  Gospel  of  Jesus  Christ  and  thereby 
received  the  call,  there  will  nevertheless  be  countless  masses 
of  men  who  died  in  the  ages  past  without  having  received 
the  special  call.  The  Bible  indeed  states  that  they  have 
received  the  general  natural  call,  but  it  does  not  deal 
further  with  the  question,  wherefore  every  attempt  to 
solve  the  problem  carries  us  into  the  realm  of  abstract 
speculation.  The  love,  righteousness  and  wisdom  of  God 
are  a  sufficient  guarantee  that  the  righteous  dominion  of 
God  shall  sometime  be  justified,  although  the  secret  councils 
of  God  are  for  the  present  inscrutable.  It  is  not  our  duty 
to  concern  ourselves  anxiously  about  the  world  dominion  of 
God,  but  to  see  to  it  that  we  ourselves  do  not  neglect  the 
call  of  God,  while  at  the  same  time  we  ought  to  labor  for 
the  propagation  of  the  kingdom  of  God  in  all  the  world. 
Furthermore  the  call  is:  2)  seria,  or  serious,  which  term 
is  used  against  Calvinism;  3)  efficax,  or  eflficacious,  both 
the  external  and  internal,  while  the  Calvinists  say,  as  be- 
fore stated,  that  only  the  internal  vocation  is  efficacious 
with  regard  to  the  elect;  4)  resistibilis,  or  that  man  can 
resist  the  call. 

4.    The  Object  of  the*  Call. 

The  object  of  the  call  is  twofold:  1)  finis  proximus, 
which  is  excitatio  or  awakening;  2)  finis  ultimus,  which  is 
conversion  and  regeneration  together  with  their  effects. 

The  old  Dogmaticians  say  that  excitatio  is  prima  initia 
fidei  et  conversionis.  Man  is  aroused  when  he  pays  heed  to 
the  call  and  under  the  influence  of  the  co-operating  grace 
begins  to  seek  the  way  of  salvation.  Awakened  out  of  the 
death  slumber  of  sin,  he  realizes  in  a  measure  the  dangerous 
situation  in  which  he  has  been  and  still  continues  to  be. 
His  eyes  are  directed  toward  the  straight  gate  and  the 
narrow  way.     The  illuminating  grace  of  God  is  active  in 

Dogmatics.     11. 


306  PNEUMATOLOGY. 

connection  with  the  call,  as  it  has  been  from  the  moment 
of  awakening.  In  some  instances  the  emotions  are  very 
greatly  aroused ;  indeed,  these  emotions  may  at  times  be- 
come peculiarly  delightful,  for  which  reason  it  may  happen 
that  this  awakening  may  be  mistaken  for  the  completed 
conversion.  At  so-called  "revival  meetings,"  especially 
among  the  Reformed,  great  emotional  excitation  is  often 
called  conversion.  But  awakening  is  only  the  beginning  of 
conversion.  It  is  not  sufficient  that  the  emotions  are 
aroused ;  the  understanding  must  be  illumined  and  the  will 
transformed.  The  Scripture  passage  to  which  reference 
is  made  with  regard  to  awakening  is  Eph.  5 :  14 :  "Awake, 
thou  that  sleepest,  and  arise  from  the  dead,  and  Christ 
shall  shine  upon  thee";  cf.  Acts  2:  37:  "Now  when  they 
heard  this,  they  were  pricked  in  their  heart";  Acts  16:  29, 
30 :  "And,  trembling  for  fear,  he  fell  down  before  Paul  and 
Silas,  and  said.  Sirs,  what  must  I  do  to  be  saved?" 


§25.    ILLUMINATION. 

Illumination,  illuminatio,  is  that  act  of  grace  ivherehy 
the  Holy  Ghost  through  the  Law  convicts  man  of  sin  and 
through  the  Gospel  imparts  to  him  knoivledge  of  the  way  of 
salvation.  This  act  of  grace  belongs  especially  to  the  con- 
verting activity  of  the  Holy  Ghost,  but  is  nevertheless  con- 
tinued through  the  s-tate  of  sanctification,  since  the  life  of 
a  Christian  is  characterized  by  daily  repentance. 

HOLLAZius  has  the  following  definition:*  "Illuminatio  is 
that  act  of  applying  grace  whereby  the  Holy  Ghost,  through 
the  ministry  of  the  Word,  instructs  the  sinner  who  is  called 
to  the  Church,  and  imparts  to  him  more  and  more  knowl- 
edge for  the  earnest  purpose  of  removing  the  darkness  of 
ignorance  and  error,  imbuing  him  with  the  knowledge  of 

♦HoLLAZius:  "Illuminatio  est  actus  gratiae  applicatricis,  quo  Spiritus 
sanctus  hominem  peccatorem  ad  ecclesiam  vocatum  per  ministerium 
verbi  docet  et  sincere  studio  magis  magisque  informat,  ut  depulsis 
ignorantiae  et  errorum  tenebris  ipsum  verbi  Deo  notitia  imbuat,  atque 
ex  lege  agnitionem  peccati,  ex  evangelio  misericordise  divinse,  in  merito 
Christi  fundatae,  cognitionem  eidem  instillet." 


ILLUMINATION.  307 

the  Word  of  God,  and  instilling  in  him  through  the  Law 
the  knowledge  of  sin,  and  through  the  Gospel  the  knowledge 
of  divine  mercy,  founded  upon  the  merit  of  Christ." 

1.  The  Division  of  Illumination. 
The  following  division  is  common  and  in  part  necessary: 
1)  Illuminatio  imperfecta,  literalis  et  2^^dagogica,  or  the 
more  literal  and  pedagogical  illumination  or  instruction. 
Gratia  assistens  is  active  in  this  connection.  The  object  of 
this  external  illumination  is  the  preparation  of  the  sinner 
for  the  spiritual  illumination.  As  to  its  object  this  peda- 
gogical illumination  is  vere  salutaris  and  as  to  its  character 
supernaturalis.  We  quote  the  following  Scripture  pas- 
sages: "And  we  have  the  word  of  prophecy  made  more 
sure;  whereunto  ye  do  well  that  ye  take  heed,  as  unto  a 
lamp  shining  in  a  dark  place,  until  the  day  dawn,  and  the 
day-star  arise  in  your  hearts"  (2  Peter  1:  19)  ;  "Unto  me, 
who  am  less  than  the  least  of  all  saints,  was  this  grace 
given,  to  preach  unto  the  Gentiles  the  unsearchable  riches 
of  Christ ;  and  to  make  all  men  see  what  is  the  dispensation 
of  the  mystery  which  for  ages  hath  been  hid  in  God  who 
created  all  things"  (Eph.  3:  8,  9).  2)  Perfecta,  spiritualis 
et  complete  salutaris,  or  the  complete,  spiritual  and  saving 
illumination,  which  implies  not  only  the  impartation  of  ex- 
ternal knowledge,  but  by  means  of  this  a  living  knowledge, 
so  that  the  Holy  Ghost  through  gratia  ingrediens  et  operans 
works  conversion  and  regeneration  and  afterwards  con- 
tinues the  work  of  illumination  through  gratia  inhabitans. 
Among  Scripture  passages  we  quote  the  following:  "That 
the  God  of  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ,  the  Father  of  glory,  may 
give  unto  you  a  spirit  of  wisdom  and  revelation  in  the 
knowledge  of  him;  having  the  eyes  of  your  heart  enlight- 
ened" (Eph.  1:  17,  18)  ;  "Seeing  it  is  God,  that  said,  Light 
shall  shine  out  of  darkness,  who  shined  in  our  hearts,  to  give 
the  light  of  the  knowledge  of  the  glory  of  God  in  the  face 
of  Jesus  Christ"  (2  Cor.  4 :  6 ;  cf .  1  Thess.  1 :  5 ;  2  Thess.  3 : 
15,  16).  3)  Legalis,  or  illumination  through  the  Law.  The 
word  of  the  Law  enlightens  the  conscience  of  man  like  the 


308  PXEUMATOLOGY. 

lightning,  so  that  he  becomes  terrified  because  of  sin  and 
fears  the  wrath  of  God.  Through  the  content  of  the  Law 
he  is  given  further  instruction  concerning  sin.  Many  Scrip- 
ture passages  could  be  quoted,  but  we  cite  only  one:  "How- 
beit,  I  had  not  known  sin,  except  through  the  law:  for  I 
had  not  known  coveting,  except  the  law  had  said.  Thou  shalt 
not  covet"  (Rom.  7:  7ff.).  4)  Evangelica,  or  illumination 
through  the  Gospel,  which  is  like  unto  the  sun  which  dispels 
the  darkness  and  illumines  the  Christ.  Compare  the  fol- 
lowing passages:  "The  light  of  the  gospel  of  the  glory  of 
Christ"  (2  Cor.  4:  4;  3:  6—11;  Luke  1:  77,  78;  4:  18; 
7:22). 

2.    The  Means  and  the  Mode  of  Illumination. 

The  ordinary  means  of  illumination  are  the  means  of 
grace,  especially  the  Word  of  God.  In  Luther's  explanation 
of  the  third  article  of  the  Creed  we  read  that  the  Holy  Ghost 
enlightens  us  with  His  gifts.  Opinions  are  divided  with 
regard  to  the  meaning  of  these  words.  Some  say  that  these 
gifts  are  the  Law  and  the  Gospel.  VON  Zeschwitz  does 
not  consider  that  the  Law  can  be  implied,  and  scarcely  the 
Gospel,  since  the  Gospel  is  especially  mentioned  in  connec- 
tion with  the  call.  On  the  other  hand,  he  sets  forth  Bap- 
tism, the  Holy  Spirit  and  the  gracious  gifts  of  the  Spirit. 
But  inasmuch  as  the  Holy  Spirit  bestows  the  gifts,  we  must 
necessarily  distinguish  between  Him  and  the  gifts  through 
which  He  enlightens.  Some  have  presented  the  effects,  such 
as  penitence  and  faith,  but  this  constitutes  an  inconsist- 
ency. Gez.  von  Schéele  says  in  this  connection:*  "What 
these  gifts  are  depends  on  the  character  of  the  particular 
means  of  grace  through  which  they  are  imparted  to  us. 
Inasmuch  as  the  Word,  apart  from  Baptism,  constitutes 
this  means,  and  since  the  Word  is  divided  as  to  its  contents 
into  the  Law  and  the  Gospel,  therefore  the  term  'gifts'  must 
denote  more  particularly  the  knowledge  of  sin  brought 
about  by  the  Law  together  with  the  knowledge  of  the  grace 
of   God   in   Christ  Jesus   imparted   through   the   Gospel." 

*  Den  Kyrkliga  Katekisationen,  p.  145. 


ILLUMINATION.  309 

Through  the  Law  and  the  Gospel  the  awakened  sinner  re- 
ceives the  light  that  is  necessary  in  order  to  reach  the  goal 
of  salvation.  Although  this  light  is  necessary  for  the  whole 
life  of  the  Christian,  yet  the  effect  of  this  illumination  is 
especially  striking  during  the  states  of  awakening  and  con- 
version. In  the  case  of  the  person  who  has  been  baptized 
in  infancy  and  through  the  Sacrament  has  become  a  child 
of  God,  but  afterwards  has  fallen  from  the  baptismal  grace, 
the  Sacrament  itself  is  a  gift  of  grace  that  points  the  way 
back  home.  The  old  Church  Fathers  also  called  Baptism 
<i>oiTL(Tfxa.  And  when  a  prodigal  son,  in  returning  to  the 
Father's  house,  visits  the  temple  of  the  Lord,  where  the 
congregation  celebrates  the  Holy  Supper,  this  Sacrament 
in  turn  becomes  a  light  that  bears  witness  of  the  true  home. 
In  the  ears  of  the  soul  awakened  out  of  the  state  of  sin  the 
words  of  the  Sacraments  become  both  a  penitential  sermon 
and  an  evangel.  The  Word  of  God,  therefore,  is  the  means 
through  which  the  Holy  Spirit  enlightens.  We  have  not 
received  the  promise  of  any  immediate  illumination,  for 
which  reason  we  reject  the  doctrines  of  the  Mystics  and 
others  bearing  on  this  matter.  The  Holy  Spirit  illumines 
mediately.  Among  Scripture  passages  the  following  may 
be  cited :  "So  belief  cometh  of  hearing,  and  hearing  by  the 
word  of  Christ"  (Rom.  10:  17). 

Adminicula,  or  auxiliaries,  are  oratio,  meditatio  et  ten- 
tatio.  The  Lord  has  especially  promised  to  give  the  Holy 
Spirit  to  them  that  ask  Him.  Cf.  Luke  11 :  13.  Concerning 
the  searching  of  the  Scriptures,  compare  John  5 :  39.  With 
regard  to  trials  we  read  in  Ps.  119:  71:  ''It  is  good  for  me 
that  I  have  been  afflicted;  that  I  may  learn  thy  statutes." 
Cf .  1  Peter  1 :  6,  7.  Periods  of  quiet  and  rest  are  necessary: 
Compare  Mark  6:  31:  "He  said  unto  them.  Come  ye  your- 
selves apart  into  a  desert  place,  and  rest  awhile."  With 
regard  to  the  doctrine  of  the  Mystics  concerning  silentium 
verborum,  cogitationum  et  desideriorum  and  concerning 
internum  animse  sabbathum,  we  approve  of  silentium  ver- 
borum  in  the  sense  that  silence  and  rest  are  necessary,  in- 
asmuch as  they  render  more  effectual  the  reading  of  the 


310  PNEUMATOLOGY. 

Word  with  its  attendant  effects.  An  internal  Sabbath  rest 
is  useful  in  promoting  earnest  meditation  and  prayer.  But 
we  cannot  accept  the  doctrine  concerning  silentium  cogita- 
tionum  et  desideriorum  through  which  man  is  supposed  to 
receive  a  special  divine  revelation  and  illumination.  God 
illumines  us  sufficiently  through  the  Word  of  God,  but  quiet 
meditation  is  necessary.  The  same  is  true  with  regard  to 
the  hearing  of  the  Word.  Compare  Eccles.  5:1:  "Keep 
thy  foot  when  thou  goest  to  the  house  of  God."  Worldly 
conversation  before  or  after  the  service  often  has  a  dis- 
turbing effect. 

3.    The  Activity  and  Object  of  Illumination. 

The  point  of  departure  in  illumination  is  the  naturally 
darkened  understanding  of  man.  Compare  Eph.  4 :  18.  The 
activity  of  illumination  is  first  directed  to  the  intellectus 
or  the  understanding,  so  that  the  seeker  after  salvation 
receives  knowledge  through  which  the  activity  is  directed 
to  the  voluntas  or  will,  since  the  object  is  such  an  influencing 
of  the  will  as  will  lead  to  conversion.  Compare  Eph.  1 :  18 ; 
2  Cor.  4 :  6  and  Titus  2 :  11,  12. 

Finis,  or  the  object,  is  divided  as  follows:  1)  finis  proxi- 
mus  is  conversion;  2)  finis  ultimus  is  the  immediate  illu- 
mination in  heaven.  The  reaching  of  the  goal  takes  place 
gradually.  Beginning  with  the  call  the  light  of  the  Word 
of  God  penetrates  into  the  darkness  of  the  sinner's  heart 
so  that  he  is  aroused.  In  case  there  is  no  wilful  opposition 
to  the  influence  of  the  Word,  then  his  eyes  are  opened  more 
and  more  and  the  awakening  becomes  deeper  and  more 
thorough.  The  sinner  then  becomes  conscious  of  a  pro- 
found need  of  the  spiritual  light.  He  reads  and  hearkens 
to  the  Word  of  God.  In  this  manner  he  learns  to  know 
himself  and  God.  The  experiences  that  he  passes  through 
are  both  bitter  and  delightful  in  character,  and  if  the  ac- 
tivity of  the  Holy  Spirit  is  permitted  to  continue  without 
hindrance,  man  turns  more  and  more  from  darkness  to 
light,  and  from  the  power  of  Satan  to  God.    The  illumina- 


CONVERSION. 


311 


tion  grows  during  conversion,  but  never  becomes  complete 
in  this  life,  for  here  we  know  only  in  part.  However,  the 
degree  of  our  illumination  is  dependent  on  the  diligent  and 
prayerful  use  of  the  Word  of  God. 


§26.    CONVERSION. 

Conversion,  conversio,  is  that  act  through  ivhich  the 
Holy  Ghost  converts  the  understanding,  the  emotions,  and 
especially  the  ivill  of  the  aivakened  shiner,  resulting  in  a 
self-determination  of  the  will,  luhich  takes  the  form  of  con- 
t7'ition  and  faith.  The  definition  of  conversion  is  dependent 
upon  whether  it  is  considered  in  the  broad  sense,  the  special 
sense,  or  the  most  special  sense.  In  the  broad  sense  con- 
version embraces  all  the  acts  of  grace,  while  in  the  most 
special  sense  it  embraces  only  contrition.  We  here  employ 
the  expression  conversion  in  the  special  sense,  as  embracing 
contrition  and  faith,  or  poenitentia.  Instead  of  contrition 
repentance  is  mostly  used. 

I.    The  General  Characteristics  of  Conversion. 

Conversion  has  both  a  human  and  a  divine  side.  As  ex- 
perienced in  the  heart  of  the  sinner,  conversion  is  instan- 
taneous as  to  the  ultimate  act,  but  successive  as  to  the  pre- 
paratory acts  in  reaching  its  object,  with  certain  factors 
active. 

1.      THE  division  OF  CONVERSION. 

The  following  terms  are  used  to  distinguish  between  the 
different  points  of  view  from  which  conversion  may  be  con- 
sidered: 1)  Conversio  trayisitiva,  because  the  converting 
activity  passes  from  God  to  another  subject.  This  transi- 
tive side  is  active  as  proceeding  from  the  Holy  Spirit,  and 
passive  by  reason  of  the  seat  of  excitation  in  the  sinner, 
and  because  he  is  the  object  of  the  preparatory  and  operat- 
ing grace.  2)  Conversio  intransitiva,  poenitentia  or  repent- 
ance. By  this  is  meant  the  changed  condition  of  the  heart 
as  affecting  the  intellect,  the  emotions  and  the  will.    Many 


312  PNEUMATOLOGY. 

passages  in  Scripture,  not  to  speak  of  the  majority  of  in- 
stances bearing  on  the  subject,  present  conversion  from  the 
intransitive  standpoint  as  consisting  in  repentance.  Com- 
pare Mai.  3:7;  Matt.  13:  14,  15;  Acts  3:  18;  2  Cor.  3:  16. 
Also  cf.  Jer.  31 :  18 :  "Turn  thou  me,  and  I  shall  be  turned." 
When  reference  is  made  to  the  human  activity,  it  it  not  the 
natural  power  of  man  that  is  implied.  The  following  Latin 
sentence  of  the  Dogmaticians  applies  in  this  connection: 
se  convertit  veribus  non  nativis,  sed  dativis. 

2.     THE  STARTING  POINT  OF  CONVERSION. 

Chemnitz  says  that  conversion  has  its  starting  points, 
its  progress  or  degrees  of  development,  through  which  it 
is  completed  in  great  weakness.  Baier  uses  the  following 
division:  1)  terminus  a  quo  formalis  is  sin,  both  habitual 
and  actual;  2)  terminus  a  quo  objectivus  consists  of  those 
things  that  are  the  objects  of  actual  sins,  especially  those 
toward  which  the  sinner  feels  a  peculiar  inclination,  such 
as  secret  or  bosom  sins.  Conversion  must  therefore  pro- 
ceed from  the  root  of  evil  and  include  the  whole  gamut  of 
*  sin.  Inasmuch  as  secret  sins  are  especially  vulnerable 
points,  therefore  conversion  must  also  include  an  attack 
upon  these. 

3.    the  factors  in  conversion. 

The  factors  in  conversion  are  the  Word  and  the  Holy 
Ghost.  There  are  not  three  factors,  as  the  Synergists  as- 
sert. The  Holy  Ghost  works  through  the  means  of  grace. 
Man  must  therefore  make  use  of  these  means.  He  is  able 
to  read  and  to  hear  the  Word  of  God,  but  will  receive  no 
blessing  to  be  converted  by  his  own  power.  For  this  reason 
the  Formula  of  Concord  rejects  the  opinions  of  the  Enthu- 
siasts and  Epicureans,  who  belittle  the  means  of  grace  and 
expect  that  God  shall  make  forceful  intervention  and  con- 
vert man  against  his  will,  thereby  removing  all  human 
responsibility.  In  this  connection  we  would  present  the 
heretical  tendencies  which  the  Formula  of  Concord  rejects  :* 

*  Miiller's  Symb.  Biicher,  Epitome  II,  pp.  524—562. 


COXVERSIOX.  313 

1)  The  doctrine  of  the  Stoics  and  the  Manichseans,  which 
declares  that  everything  happens  through  necessity,  so  that 
man  possesses  no  freedom.  2)  The  Pelagian  view,  which 
says  that  man  is  capable  of  converting  himself  with  his 
own  power.  3)  The  Semi-Pelagian  view,  which  teaches 
that  man  himself  is  capable  of  beginning  the  work  of  con- 
version, but  by  reason  of  human  weakness  the  Holy  Ghost 
must  continue  the  work.  4)  The  position  of  the  Synergists, 
which  holds  that  God  begins  the  work  of  conversion,  but 
that  man  is  thereafter  capable  in  his  own  power,  which  is 
weak,  to  co-operate  in  and  continue  that  work.  5)  The 
heresy  of  the  Flacians,  which  teaches  that  in  conversion 
God  entirely  outroots  the  substance  and  essence  of  the  old 
Adam.  6)  The  further  doctrine  of  the  Flacians,  that  man 
even  after  his  conversion  withstands  the  Holy  Spirit,  so 
that  no  co-operation  takes  place  with  the  spiritual  powers 
imparted  by  the  Holy  Ghost.  7)  The  teaching  of  the  popes 
and  monks,  that  the  regenerated  man  is  fully  capable  of 
completely  fulfilling  the  Law  of  God,  which  also  constitutes 
the  righteousness  of  man,  and  through  which  he  merits 
eternal  life.  Such  expressions  as  those  of  Chrysostom  and 
Basil  here  quoted  are  also  rejected:  "God  draws  but  him 
who  wills ;  if  only  you  will,  God  will  meet  you  beforehand." 
The  Lutheran  Confession  sets  forth  the  means  of  grace 
and  the  activity  of  the  Holy  Ghost  through  these.  Through 
grace  therefore  the  will  of  man  is  made  free,  but  inasmuch 
as  man  is  incapable  of  doing  anything  in  his  own  power, 
therefore  the  natural  human  will  is  not  a  factor  in  conver- 
sion. Man  could  not  possess  himself  in  a  state  of  pas- 
sivity, except  as  the  Holy  Ghost  works  through  His  pre- 
venient  grace.  The  responsibility  of  man  arises  when  he 
does  not  permit  the  Holy  Spirit  to  perform  this  work,  but 
withstands  the  Spirit  and  neglects  to  use  the  Word  of  God. 
For  this  reason  the  Formula  of  Concord  says:*  "And  in 
this  respect  it  might  well  be  said  that  man  is  not  a  stone 
or  block.  For  a  stone  or  block  does  not  resist  that  which 
moves  it,  and  does  not  understand  and  is  not  sensible  of 

*  Miiller's  Symb.  Biicher,  p.  602,  59. 


314  PXEUMATOLOGY. 

what  is  being  done  with  it,  as  a  man,  as  long  as  he  is  not 
converted,  with  his  will  resists  God  the  Lord.  And  it  is 
nevertheless  true  that  a  man  before  his  conversion  is  still 
a  rational  creature,  having  an  understanding  and  will,  yet 
not  an  understanding  with  respect  to  divine  things,  or  a 
will  to  will  something  good  and  salutary.  Yet  he  can  do 
nothing  whatever  for  his  conversion  (as  has  also  been  said 
often  above) ,  and  is  in  this  respect  much  worse  than  a  stone 
and  block;  for  he  resists  the  Word  and  will  of  God,  until 
God  awakens  him  from  the  death  of  sin,  enlightens  and 
renews  him."  The  Formula  of  Concord  therefore  treats  of 
the  utter  inability  of  the  natural  man.  In  considering  the 
natural  state  of  man,  and  realizing  that  it  is  only  the  grace 
of  God  that  can  set  at  liberty  the  will  of  man,  we  compre- 
hend the  reason  why  there  are  but  two  factors  in  conver- 
sion, as  has  been  stated.     Cf.  §15,  4,  and  §7,  2. 

4.     THE  OBJECT  OF  CONVERSION. 

Finis  conversionis  is  twofold:  1)  finis  formalis  is  faith 
in  Christ;  2)  finis  ohjectivus  is  God.  Inasmuch  as  conver- 
sion consists  in  contrition  and  faith,  therefore  conversion 
is  completed  through  faith.  Through  faith  man  has  re- 
turned to  God.  The  converted  man  lives  in  daily  contrition 
and  faith,  which  is  the  same  as  daily  repentance.  The  fol- 
lowing Scripture  passages  may  be  quoted:  "Repent  ye" 
(Acts  2:  38)  ;  "Believe  on  the  Lord  Jesus"  (Acts  16:  31)  ; 
"For  he  that  cometh  to  God  must  believe  that  he  is,  and 
that  he  is  a  rewarder  of  them  that  seek  after  him"  (Heb. 
11:6);  "I  will  arise  and  go  to  my  father,  and  say  unto  him. 
Father,  I  have  sinned  against  heaven,  and  in  thy  sight" 
(Luke  15:  18)  ;  "And  he  arose,  and  came  to  his  father" 
(Luke  15:  20). 

II.    Contrition. 

Contrition  is  the  first  element  in  conversio  intransitiva  or 
poenitentia.  The  first  contrition  is  called  the  great  contri^ 
tion  or  poenitentia  magna,  the  renewed  contrition  of  a  fallen 
Christian  is  called  poenitentia  iterata,  while  the  daily  con- 


CONVERSION.  315 

trition  of  a  Christian  is  called  jxjenitentia  stantium.  Strictly- 
speaking,  however,  contrition  is  the  first  element  in  poeni- 
tentia  or  repentance.  We  define  contrition  as  follows: 
Contrition  is  that  change  of  mind  or  heart  in  man  in  rela- 
tion to  sin,  made  known  through  the  illumination  by  the 
Laiv,  which  manifests  itself  in  deep  sorrow  and  fear  of  con- 
science because  of  sin  together  ivith  a  detestation  of  sin  and 
a  faithfid  endeavor  to  be  rid  of  it. 

The  Greek  word  that  has  been  rendered  with  "repent- 
ance" is  /xeravota  and  means  really  change  of  mind  or  heart. 
The  same  word  seems  also  to  be  used  in  the  sense  of  con- 
trition. Compare  Mark  1 :  15 :  "Repent  ye,  and  believe  in 
the  gospel."  In  this  passage  /AeravoetTe  might  be  translated 
"be  contrite"  or  "be  changed  in  mind,"  followed  as  it  is  by 
the  admonition  to  believe,  which  is  a  component  part  of  the 
concept  repentance.  Compare,  for  example.  Acts  2:  38 
and  2  Cor.  7:  10.  The  verb  that  is  used  for  contrition  is 
fi€TafX€\ofxaL,  but  the  substautive  |U.era/xeAeia  does  not  occur  in 
the  New  Testament.  Mcravota  is  used  to  express  both  con- 
trition and  repentance.  2  Cor.  7:  10  speaks  of  repentance 
which  bringeth  no  regret. 

1.      THE  REQUISITES  AND  MARKS  OF  CONTRITION. 

According  to  Gerhard  the  partes  contritionis  are  the  fol- 
lowing:* 1)  vera  peccati  agnitio,  or  a  true  knowledge  of 
sin;  2)  sensiis  irx  divinm  adversus  peccata,  or  the  con- 
sciousness of  the  wrath  of  God  against  sin;  3)  conscientise 
angores  et  pavores,  or  the  anguish  and  terror  of  the  con- 
science; 4)  vera  coram  Deo  humiliatio,  or  true  humility 
before  God;  5)  ingenua  peccati  confessio,  or  a  candid  con- 
fession of  sin;  6)  serium  peccati  odium  ac  detestatio,  or  an 
earnest  hatred  and  detestation  of  sin. 

The  Confessions  and  the  old  Dogmaticians  emphasize 
terrores  conscientix.  In  the  Augsburg  Confession,  Article 
XII,  we  read:  "Now  repentance  consists  properly  of  two 
parts:  One  is  contrition,  that  is,  terrors  smiting  the  con- 

*  Loci  Theologici,  Tomus  III,  p.  238,  63. 


316  PNEUMATOLOGY. 

science  through  the  knowledge.  The  terror  of  the  con- 
science through  the  knowledge  of  sin,"  etc.  The  terror  of 
the  conscience  may  vary  in  degree,  but  all  contrite  souls  ex- 
perience this  terror  on  different  occasions.  The  anguish  of 
heart  because  of  sin  may  vary  in  accordance  with  many  cir- 
cumstances, both  internal  and  external,  but  every  one  must 
know  the  nature  of  sin  and  its  effects.  This  internal  sorrow 
may  not  always  manifest  itself  in  strong  crying,  or  in  a 
manner  that  may  be  observed  by  others,  but  is  nevertheless 
intensive.  The  external  manifestation  varies  with  the  per- 
sonal temperament  and  other  influences.  He  that  loudly 
laments  may  suffer  less  than  the  contrite  sinner  who  quietly 
experiences  the  sorrow  that  is  of  the  godly  sort.  It  may 
often  prove  true  that  loud  crying  and  lamentation  and 
violent  gesticulation  indicate  merely  aroused  emotions  but 
no  profound  contrition,  as  is  often  the  case  at  pre-arranged 
"revival  meetings."  It  may  not  be  possible,  indeed,  to  de-, 
termine  theoretically  the  decisive  and  unfailing  character- 
istics by  which  to  gauge  the  experience  of  the  contrite  sin- 
ner, but  the  above  named  parts  make  clear  the  principal 
features. 

The  marks  of  true  contrition  may  also  be  presented  as 
follows:  1)  Interna:  a)  knowledge  of  sin  and  the  conscious- 
ness of  God's  wrath  on  account  of  sin;  b)  sorrow  and 
anguish  of  conscience;  c)  detestation  of  sin  and  therefore 
an  internal  resolution  to  forsake  sin ;  d)  yearning  for  re- 
demption. 2)  Externa:  a)  earnest  confession  of  sin  before 
God  and  in  certain  cases  before  a  minister  of  the  Word  or 
some  other  Christian;  b)  the  diligent  use  of  the  Word; 
c)  the  continued  works  of  grace;  d)  the  fruits  of  contrition 
in  the  newness  of  life. 

The  following  Scripture  passages  may  be  quoted:  "For 
I  know  my  transgressions;  and  my  sin  is  ever  before  me" 
(Ps.  51:  3)  ;  "There  is  no  soundness  in  my  flesh  because  of 
thine  indignation;  neither  is  there  any  health  in  my  bones 
because  of  my  sin"  (Ps.  38:  3)  ;  "Have  mercy  upon  me,  O 
Jehovah ;  for  I  am  withered  away :  my  soul  is  sore  troubled" 
(Ps.  6:  2,  3)  ;  "Humble  yourselves  in  the  sight  of  the  Lord, 


CONVERSION.  317 

and  he  shall  exalt  you"  (James  4:  10)  ;  "I  will  confess  my 
transgressions  unto  Jehovah"  (Ps.  32:  5)  ;  "What  I  hate, 
that  I  do"  (Rom.  7:  15)  ;  "God,  be  thou  merciful  to  me  a 
sinner"  (Luke  18:  13).  In  proof  of  the  fact  that  contrition 
implies  a  new  relationship  the  following  may  be  cited:  "If 
I  have  wrongfully  exacted  aught  of  any  man,  I  restore  four- 
fold" (Luke  19:  8).  Such  a  restitution  proves  the  genuine- 
ness of  contrition,  provided  that  other  characteristics  are 
present. 

2.  THE  OBJECT  OF  CONTRITION. 

Objectum  contritionis  is  sin.  The  objects  of  contrition 
are  sins,  both  habitual  and  actual  sins,  especially  secret  or 
bosom  sins.  Certain  sins  may  manifest  themselves  more 
than  others,  but  the  contrite  sinner  grieves  over  his  entire 
sinful  state.  Contrition  may  often  begin  on  account  of  one 
individual  sin,  but  through  the  activity  of  the  Spirit  the 
knowledge  of  one  sin  leads  to  the  knowledge  of  others,  at 
first  more  grievous  and  palpable  sins,  afterwards  less  palpa- 
ble; at  first  external  sins,  then  internal,  the  conscience  be- 
coming more  sensitive  all  the  while.  The  sorrow  becomes 
all  the  deeper  as  man  realizes  his  own  inability  to  deliver 
himself  from  sin,  and  that  his  contrition  is  not  as  profound 
as  it  ought  to  be,  wherefore  he  laments  because  of  his  im- 
penitence. In  a  measure  his  experience  becomes  like  unto 
that  described  in  Rom.  7 :  7 — 14.  The  object  of  contrition 
is  therefore  not  the  punishment  of  sin,  so  as  to  cause  grief 
only  on  account  of  the  effects  of  sin ;  the  penitent  grieves 
over  sin  itself  as  sin  against  God. 

3.  THE  EFFECTS  OF  CONTRITION. 

Effectus  contritionis  comprises  the  following  parts:  1) 
more  profound  knowledge  of  the  demands  of  the  Law;  2)  a 
genuine  consciousness  of  sin;  3)  the  experience  of  inability 
to  save  oneself;  4)  the  elimination  of  hindrances  in  the 
way  of  repentance. 

The  transition  from  contrition  to  faith  is  a  critical  period 
in  the  experience  of  the  awakened  and  contrite  soul,  for  he 


318  PXEUMATOLOGY. 

stands  in  danger  either  of  reverting  to  the  natural  state  or 
of  entering  into  a  state  of  bondage  under  the  Law,  But 
where  the  spiritual  experience  is  normal,  there  the  contrite 
sinner  becomes  poor  in  spirit.  The  storm  clouds  of  the  Law 
may  threaten  overhead,  but  through  the  knowledge  of  the 
Gospel  the  clouds  are  dispersed.  Faith  is  already  present 
as  a  real  possibility.  A  sense  of  yearning  possesses  the 
soul.  Faith  reveals  itself  first  in  seeking  and  longing.  We 
find  a  Biblical  expression  of  the  effect  of  contrition  in  the 
words  of  Paul  in  2  Cor.  7 :  10 :  "For  godly  sorrow  worketh 
repentance  unto  salvation." 

IIL    Faith. 

The  immediate  end  of  contrition  or  penitence  is  faith, 
which  is  the  second  part  of  conversion.  Faith  may  be  de- 
fined as  follows :  Fides  is  that  gracious  act  of  the  Holy 
Ghost  ivhereby  the  contrite  sinner,  in  process  of  conver- 
sion, in  a  living  way  knoivs,  with  his  tohole  heart  assents 
to,  and  ivith  childlike  trust  apprehends  the  saving  grace  of 
God,  in  order  that  he  may  he  justified  a7id  eternally  saved 
for  Christ's  sake. 

The  Greek  word  for  faith  is  Trto-rt?.  In  Heb.  11:1  faith 
is  defined  as  follows:  "Now  faith  is  assurance  of  things 
hoped  for,  a  conviction  of  things  not  seen."  The  word 
translated  assurance  is  in  the  Greek  vTrdo-rao-ts,  which  means 
foundation,  substratum,  substance,  the  essence  of  a  thing, 
and  therefore  denotes  the  unshakable  reliance  of  the  heart, 
the  assurance  of  building  on  a  sure  foundation.  Faith  is 
assurance  or  confidence.  Compare  2  Cor.  3 :  4  and  Eph.  3 : 
12.  The  latter  passage  also  speaks  of  boldness  in  confi- 
dence. Faith  is  also  a  certain  and  unmovable  conviction. 
Compare  Rom.  4:  21;  Col.  2:  2,  and  Heb.  10:  22. 

It  is  God  that  works  faith  through  the  means  of  grace. 
Causa  efficiens  pi-incipalis  is  the  Triune  God,  causa  impul- 
siva interna  is  the  goodness  of  God,  cause  impulsiva  externa 
is  the  merit  of  Christ,  and  causa  instimmentalis  is  the  Word, 
or  Baptism,  or  the  means  of  grace  in  general. 


coxvERSiorv".  319 

1.     THE  ELEMENTS  OF  FAITH. 

Partes  fidei  are:  1)  Notitia,  or  knowledge.  The  knowl- 
edge of  faith  is  not  so  much  implicita,  it  is  principally  ex- 
plicita.  When  faith  is  considered  as  a  fides  implicita,  it 
denotes  simply  an  historic  faith,  so  that  without  examina- 
tion man  believes  what  the  Church  teaches.  On  the  other 
hand,  the  knowledge  which  is  characteristic  of  fides  ex- 
plicita  denotes  that  which  is  believed,  that  which  is  known 
in  a  distinctive  sense,  so  that  it  can  be  distinguished  from 
other  objects,  even  though  it  cannot  be  clearly  or  completely 
comprehended.  Among  Scripture  passages  may  be  cited: 
"And  we  have  believed  and  know  that  thou  art  the  Holy 
One  of  God"  (John  6:  69;  cf.  17:  3;  Luke  1:  77;  John 
14:  10).  2)  Assensus,  or  assent.  This  assensus  is  twofold: 
a)  generalis,  or  a  general  assent,  when  the  acknowledgment 
is  made  that  the  promises  of  God  and  the  merit  of  Christ 
are  true;  b)  specialis,  or  an  assent  that  implies  that  the 
contrite  person  considers  that  these  promises  and  this  merit 
are  true  for  him  personally.  This  assent  includes  a  con- 
viction of  things  not  seen.  Compare  Heb.  11 :  1 ;  also  1 
Tim.  1 :  15,  which  sets  forth  both  assensus  generalis  et 
specialis.  Cf.  also  John  14:  11.  3)  Fidiicia,  or  confidence. 
Fiducia  is  the  childlike  trust  of  the  will  in  Christ  and 
therefore  implies  the  personal  application  and  appropria- 
tion of  the  Gospel  promises  and  the  merit  of  Christ.  In  a 
higher  degree  it  is  the  yearning  of  the  faith  of  repentance, 
indeed,  it  is  the  confident  assurance  of  the  heart.  Among 
Scripture  passages  may  be  mentioned:  "And  being  fully 
assured  that  what  he  had  promised,  he  was  able  also  to 
perform"  (Rom.  4:  21)  ;  "In  fulness  of  faith"  (Heb.  10: 
22)  ;  "Confidence"  (2  Cor.  3:  4;  cf.  Eph.  3:  12,  etc.).  Of 
course,  confidence  has  its  varying  degrees,  so  that  some  can 
believe  with  greater  trustfulness  than  others.  Compare 
John  14:  12;  17:  8;  1  John  3 :  21 ;  Heb.  11:  1,  etc. 

The  three  elements  of  faith  are  set  forth  in  John  14 :  10 
— 12.  Notitia  is  presented  in  the  tenth  verse,  assensus  in 
the  eleventh  and  fiducia  in  the  twelfth  verse.     The  three 


320  PNEUMATOLOGY. 

elements  are  also  expressed  in  the  following  Latin  phrases : 
Credere  Deum,  which  means  faith  in  the  existence  of  God 
and  the  knowledge  of  God  in  general,  credere  Deo,  which 
denotes  faith  in  the  Word  and  promises  of  God,  credere  in 
Deum,  which  signifies  the  inmost  essence  of  faith  or  con- 
fidence. Only  a  Christian  has  faith  in  the  last-named  sense, 
but  in  adults  this  includes  also  the  first  and  second. 

2.     THE  ATTRIBUTES  OF  FAITH. 

The  character  of  faith  is  determined  through  divisions 
which  at  the  same  time  constitute  attributes.  These  attri- 
butes describe  more  clearly  the  essense  and  degree  of  faith. 
The  following  are  the  most  common:  1)  fides  generalis,  or 
a  general  faith  in  the  truth  of  the  Word  of  God;  2)  speci- 
alis,  or  the  personal  confidence  of  the  contrite  sinner  in  the 
gracious  promises  of  God;  3)  appr-ehetisiva  et  justificans 
is  faith  as  apprehending  the  merit  of  Christ,  thus  appro- 
priating the  grace  of  forgiveness ;  4)  veflexa  et  disciirsiva 
is  the  faith  of  the  converted  sinner,  who  knows  that  he 
believes,  so  that  with  childlike  fear  he  is  enabled  to  say 
with  Paul:  "I  know  him  whom  I  have  believed";  5)  fides 
directa  is  a  faith  like  the  faith  of  small  children,  wrought 
at  their  Baptism;  6)  infinna,  or  a  weak  faith,  which  is 
nevertheless  a  true  faith;   7)  firma,  or  a  strong  faith. 

When  repentance  has  been  completed,  i.  e.,  the  so-called 
great  repentance,  then  yearning  faith  enters  into  the  heart 
of  the  contrite  sinner,  resulting  in  the  conviction  of  faith, 
the  consecration  of  the  will  and  the  confident  assurance  of 
faith.  But  this  special  and  reflexive  faith  is  not  always 
firm,  but  often  infirm.  The  converted  sinner,  however,  is 
always  inclined  toward  the  object  of  his  faith.  This  ex- 
perience is  closely  connected  with  the  effect  of  faith. 

In  distinguishing  between  reflex  or  discursive  and  direct 
faith  we  must  consider  that  the  first  kindling  of  faith  is 
direct  faith  both  in  children  and  grown  persons.  The  Holy 
Spirit  works  faith  by  the  means  of  grace,  in  children  by 
Baptism,  as  before  stated.  The  instrumental  cause  of  faith 
is  the  preaching  of  the  Word  and  the  Sacraments,  but  the 


CONVERSION.  321 

children  cannot  understandingly  hear  the  Word.  Their 
faith  also  becomes  discursive  later  on.  The  direct  faith  of 
a  child  is  nevertheless  a  true  faith,  although  it  is  embryonic 
in  its  character.  The  acorn  contains  the  entire  oak.  Just 
as  God  created  a  cell,  a  seed  or  an  acorn,  the  Holy  Spirit 
works  faith  in  a  child  by  Baptism,  and  this  faith  saves  just 
as  does  the  discursive  faith.  The  saving  faith  does  not 
depend  upon  our  understanding  and  our  own  power,  but 
upon  the  power  of  God.  —  Among  other  attributes  we  men- 
tion implicit,  explicit,  and  crude,  (fides  informis),  and  faith 
energized  or  determined  by  love.  The  implicit  faith  is  the 
same  as  notitia  implicita  which  implies  an  acceptance  of 
what  is  known  and  many  particulars  which  are  not  known. 
When  a  member  of  the  Church  accepts  the  authority  of  the 
Church,  such  a  person  believes  what  the  Church  has  taught, 
teaches  and  will  teach.  The  explicit  faith  is  like  notitia 
explicita.  Compare  above.  The  crude  faith  is  an  assent 
to  the  Church  doctrine  and  is  in  fact  the  same  as  a  historical 
faith.  But  the  Augsburg  Confession  says :  "Faith  does  not 
signify  merely  the  knowledge  of  the  history."  The  scho- 
lastic 'faith  energized  by  love'  is  a  Roman  Catholic  doc- 
trine. This  term  implies  that  faith  justifies  by  the  virtue 
of  love  pervading  it.  But  the  correct  doctrine  is  that  we 
are  justified  not  on  account  of  our  faith,  nor  on  account 
of  our  love,  but  through  faith  on  account  of  the  merits  of 
Christ.  The  good  works  follow  faith  as  fruits  of  faith. 
Compare  the  following  paragraph. 

3.     THE  EFFECT  AND  OBJECT  OF  FAITH. 

Effectus  fidei  is  righteousness  and  the  new  life,  since 
faith  implies  both  vis  receptiva  and  vis  operativa.  It  is 
vis  receptiva  as  a  justifying  faith  and  vis  operativa  as  a 
renewing  and  sanctifying  faith.  Faith  is  indeed  the  be- 
ginning of  a  new  life,  but  the  character  of  faith  is  recep- 
tive. Operative  faith  is  therefore  not  conceived  of  as  being 
determined  by  love,  as  the  Catholic  Church  speaks  of  a 
fides  caritate  formata.  Love  is  a  fruit  of  faith ;  love  is  not 
operative  through  faith,  but  faith  through  love.     Gez.  von 


322  P.NEUAIATOLOGY. 

SCHÉELE  says  in  this  connection:*  "In  accordance  with  the 
direction  of  the  Word  of  God  the  Lutheran  Church  com- 
bines in  indissoluble  union  true  faith  and  true  love,  but 
instead  of  the  fides  caritate  formata  of  the  Catholic  Church, 
she  sets  forth  a  caritas  fide  formata  in  the  certain  convic- 
tion that  no  true  love  can  be  brought  about  except  through 
union  with  Christ  by  faith;  only  as  love  enters  the  heart 
through  justifying  faith  is  it  enabled  to  take  form  in  the 
deeds  of  Christian  love." 

Fmis  fidei  is  in  the  first  place  justification  and  then  new 
relationship  as  the  children  of  God,  followed  by  renovation 
and  finally  eternal  salvation.  The  doctrine  of  faith  stands 
in  the  most  intimate  relationship  to  the  doctrine  of  justi- 
fication. 

Notes  on  the  History  of  Dogma. 

The  Apostolic  Church  set  forth  the  great  importance  of 
contrition  as  the  first  element  in  conversion.  Great  em- 
phasis was  also  laid  on  contritio  iterata,  especially  in  con- 
nection with  church  discipline.  When  a  person  had  fallen 
into  sin  and  become  the  object  of  church  discipline  it  was 
not  sufficient  for  his  reinstatement  that  he  manifested  a  con- 
trite spirit,  his  penance  must  include  a  certain  graduated 
order  of  procedure  before  restoration  could  be  accomplished. 
This  order  of  procedure  included  the  following  four  stages : 
Fletus,  or  standing  at  the  church  doors  to  make  supplica- 
tion for  restoration;  auditio,  in  which  the  penitents  were 
admitted  again  to  the  reading  of  the  Scriptures  and  the 
sermon ;  genuflexio,  in  which  they  were  admitted  into  the 
nave  of  the  church  to  kneel  at  prayer;  consistentia,  or  in 
standing  posture  to  take  part  with  the  congregation  in  the 
w^hole  of  the  public  services.  The  conception  of  faith  was 
not  so  profound  during  the  Apologetic  and  Polemical  peri- 
ods. The  Roman  Catholic  Church's  doctrine  of  contrition 
and  faith  was  developed  during  the  early  Scholastic  period. 
It  took  the  position  that  poenitentia  or  repentance  consisted 
of    the    following    parts:    1)    Penitence,    which    is    either 

*  Symbolik,  page  224. 


COXVERSION.  323 

attritio,  imperfect  penitence,  which  arises  through  the  fear 
of  punishment,  or  contritio,  perfect  penitence;  2)  private 
confession  before  the  priest;  3)  satisfactions.  Faith  was 
conceived  of  as  fides  informis  and  formata.  The  Lutheran 
Confessions  set  forth  contrition  as  the  first  part  of  conver- 
sion. Contrition  is  the  sorrow  of  the  heart  and  the  terror 
of  the  conscience  brought  about  by  the  knowledge  of  sin. 
Faith  is  conceived  of  as  being  apprehensive,  and  one  of  its 
most  important  characteristics  is  said  to  be  fiducia  in 
voluntate.  The  Reformed  Church  does  not  have  the  pro- 
found conception  of  the  knowledge  of  sin  which  is  charac- 
teristic of  the  Lutheran  Church.  The  condition  of  guilt 
before  God  is  not  sufficiently  emphasized,  hence  the  recon- 
ciliation is  viewed  first  and  foremost  as  a  redemption.  The 
doctrine  of  penitence  is  affected  to  some  extent  by  this 
view,  although  the  Reformed  Church  acknowledges  the  im- 
portance of  true  contrition.  However,  the  state  of  the  emo- 
tions often  forms  the  gauge  by  which  to  judge  the  genuine- 
ness of  contrition.  The  Lutheran  Church  lays  the  greatest 
stress  on  the  sorrow  of  the  heart  and  the  fear  of  conscience 
as  a  result  of  the  profound  consciousness  of  sin.  The  knowl- 
edge of  sin  must  be  such  that  the  ensuing  contrition  will 
affect  the  will.  The  conception  of  faith  held  by  the  Re- 
formed Church  is  more  nearly  related  to  that  of  the  Catholic 
Church  than  the  Lutheran.  The  apprehensive  character  of 
faith  is  not  sufficiently  emphasized;  rather  faith  is  pre- 
sented as  a  principle  of  life.  In  some  manner  faith  is  deter- 
mined by  something  within  man.  The  conception  of  faith 
occupies  a  more  prominent  position  than  the  doctrine  of 
justification.  We  pass  on  now  to  the  presentation  of  more 
detailed  remarks  concerning  the  doctrine  of  repentance 
during  the  leading  periods. 

,  Clement  of  Rome  emphasizes  the  justifying  character  of  faith,  but 
declares,  however,  that  love  is  a  means  to  the  forgiveness  of  sins. 
Ignatius  says  that  faith  is  the  beginning  of  life  and  love  the  goal. 
Justin  Maktyr  speaks  of  faith  in  connection  with  the  blotting  out  of 
sin.  Iben.eus  presents  faith  and  obedience  as  being  necessary  for 
salvation.  Tertullian,  Clement  of  Alexandria  and  Cyprian  indeed 
present  faith,  but  they  especially  emphasize  the  necessity  of  penance 


324  P.NEUMATOLOGY. 

for  sins  committed  after  Baptism.  Origen  lays  great  stress  on  the 
degree  of  contrition  and  teaches  that  minor  sins  may  be  reconciled 
through  penances.  He  expresses  himself  very  vaguely  concerning 
faith. 

AuGLTSTiNE  considered  that  it  was  not  proper  to  distinguish  between 
sins  and  emphasized  penance  in  relation  to  God.  He  says  that  faith 
is  active  through  love  and  is  determined  by  love.  His  doctrine  of 
faith  was  expressed  in  the  terms  fides  historica  et  formata.  Penance 
was  necessary  for  the  grosser  sins  committed  after  Baptism.  Joiix 
OF  Damascus  speaks  of  a  twofold  faith,  being  in  the  first  place  an 
assensus  and  then  fiducia. 

Anselm  regarded  faith  as  the  acceptation  of  the  objective  teachings 
of  the  Church.  Peter  Lombard  defines  faith  as  fides  informis  or  faith 
in  the  teachings  of  the  Church  and  fides  formata,  i.  e.,  as  determined 
by  love.  He  also  speaks  of  credere  Deum  or  faith  in  the  existence  of 
God,  credere  Deo  or  faith  in  the  truth  of  the  Word  of  God,  and  credere 
in  Deum,  meaning  to  love  God  in  faith,  which  faith  is  meritorious  as 
one  of  the  Christian  graces.  Thomas  Aquinas  also  says  that  fides 
formata  is  one  of  the  Christian  graces. 

Luther  conceived  of  faith  as  being  the  true  assurance  of  the  heart. 
Faith  embraces  Christ  as  the  bridal  ring  encloses  the  precious  jewel. 
With  regard  to  contrition  the  Schmalkald  Articles  state  that  it  is 
effected  by  the  Law,  that  it  is  not  contritio  activa,  but  passiva,  ex- 
cluding all  merit.  Contrition  consists  in  the  broken  and  contrite 
heart,  the  pain  of  the  awakened  conscience,  the  anguish  of  soul  to- 
gether with  the  consciousness  and  fear  of  impending  death.  The  fear 
of  conscience  is  therefore  emphasized.  Repentance  must  be  experi- 
enced by  every  man,  while  it  must  embrace  everything  in  life  and 
continue  always.  In  the  Confessions  the  apprehensive  character  of 
faith  is  set  forth,  while  the  doctrine  of  a  faith  determined  by  love  is 
rejected.  Conversion  is  said  to  consist  of  two  parts,  namely,  con- 
trition and  faith.  Melanchthon  divided  conversion  into  two  parts, 
but  in  the  Apology  he  states  that  he  would  interpose  no  objection  if 
a  third  part  were  added,  i.  e.,  the  fruit  of  repentance.  However,  the 
fruit  of  repentance  is  not  a  part  of  conversion,  but  a  result.  Agricola 
held  a  position  different  from  that  of  the  Lutheran  Church  concerning 
the  place  of  contrition  in  the  order  of  salvation.  His  arrangement  of 
the  ordo  salutis  is  as  follows:  1)  Man  experiences  the  love  of  God 
which  leads  to  Christ  and  the  bestowal  of  His  grace;  2)  he  apprehends 
this  grace  and  thanks  God  for  it;  3)  then  follows  contrition  or  re- 
pentance; 4)  thereafter  comes  the  heart's  confidence  toward  God  and 
a  resolution  to  sin  no  more.  The  Catholics  reject  the  Lutheran  doctrine 
that  poenitentia  or  conversion  consists  of  contrition  and  faith.  They 
rather  consider  faith  as  a  presupposition  to  conversion,  which  consists 
of  contritio,  confessio  and  satisfactio.     The  Council  of  Trent  condemns 


JUSTIFICATION.  325 

those  who  say  that  faith  is  fiducia.  Bellarmin  says  that  the  Catholics 
differ  in  three  things  from  the  heretics:  in  the  first  place  concerning 
the  object  of  justifying  faith,  because  the  heretics  limit  themselves 
to  the  promise  of  a  special  mercy;  in  the  second  place  with  regard 
to  the  seat  (sedes)  of  faith,  inasmuch  as  the  heretics  say  fiducia  in 
voluntate  and  the  Catholics  say  in  intellectu;  in  the  third  place  con- 
cerning the  conception  itself,  since  the  Catholics  say  that  assensus 
expresses  the  content  of  faith,  while  the  heretics  declare  it  is  fiducia. 

The  Rationalists,  such  as  Wegscheider,  reject  the  order  of  salvation 
and  set  forth  the  power  of  man  to  save  himself.  It  is  necessary  only 
for  the  ignorant  to  believe  in  a  supernatural  activity  in  conversion, 
since  they  are  incapable  of  comprehending  how  God  influences  causas 
secundas  in  accordance  with  the  laws  of  nature.  They  reject  the 
Church  doctrine  of  faith  and  present  the  so-called  intellectual  faith. 
In  the  main  Kant  held  the  same  position.  He  emphasized  the  freedom 
of  man  and  the  intellectual  faith.  The  Siipranatiiralists  desired  to 
defend  the  Church  doctrine  of  conversion,  but  in  many  respects  yielded 
to  the  Rationalists.  Some  said  that  the  work  of  grace  was  simply  a 
strengthening  of  the  powers  of  nature.  The  mediating  theologians  did 
not  conceive  of  faith  in  its  purely  receptive  character.  The  modern 
theologians  are  divided  into  two  camps,  depending  upon  whether  they 
follow  the  conservative  doctrine  of  the  Church  or  the  mediating 
theology.  Thomasius,  Philippi  and  others  present  the  doctrine  of  the 
Church,  while  Kahxis  and  others  tend  toward  Synergism.  Schartau 
in  Sweden  has  especially  emphasized  the  third  article  of  the  Creed 
and  in  a  very  detailed  manner  has  developed  the  doctrine  of  ordo 
salutis.  NoRBECK  defines  conversion  merely  as  contrition  and  says 
that  this  is  conversion  in  the  real  sense  (strictissime).  But  he  con- 
ceives of  repentance  as  consisting  of  contrition  and  faith.  —  Other 
quot9,tions  could  be  presented  to  show  how  Dogmaticians  differ  in  their 
definitions  of  repentance,  conversion  and  regeneration.  Although  the 
differences  may  be  explained  in  a  satisfactory  manner,  still  it  would 
be  well  if  the  terminology  and  definitions  could  be  made  more  definite. 

§27.    JUSTIFICATION. 

Many  Dogmaticians  treat  the  doctrine  of  justification 
before  the  order  of  salvation  by  reason  of  the  fact  that 
justification  is  an  act  of  God  that  takes  place  outside  of 
man,  and,  therefore,  stricte  dicto,  does  not  belong  to  the 
ordo  salutis,  but  we  present  this  doctrine  of  justification  in 
its  logical  connection  with  faith,  since,  as  has  been  stated, 
finis  fidei  is  justification.  The  presupposition  and  condition 
of  justification  is  faith.     Inasmuch  as  the  doctrine  of  for- 


326  PNEUMATOLOGV. 

giveness  of  sins  is  treated  in  the  third  article  of  the  Creed, 
therefore  it  cannot  be  out  of  place  to  treat  justification  in 
the  order  of  salvation.  If  the  Holy  Ghost  were  not  active 
« in  the  genesis  of  faith,  then  no  justification  could  take  place. 
The  efl'ects  of  justification  also  belong  to  the  order  of  salva- 
tion. Let  it  be  understood  that  justification  is  not  to  be 
compared  with  or  is  like  other  acts  in  the  ordo  salutis;  its 
position  is  more  objective.  As  reconciliation  occupies  the 
central  position  in  the  objective  work  of  salvation,  so  justi- 
fication occupies  the  central  and  dominating  position  in  the 
applying  activity  of  salvation.  Conversion,  whose  end  and 
purpose  is  faith,  precedes,  and  sanctification  follows  justi- 
fication. But  since  justification  takes  place  in  the  heart  or 
mind  of  God  when  the  contrite  sinner  believes,  so  it  is  the 
divine  side  of  the  activity  of  grace,  the  invisible  forensic 
act  and  the  objective  ground,  whose  effects  are  realized  in 
the  experience  of  the  believer.  Justification  is  the  keystone 
of  the  Lutheran  doctrinal  system  and  therefore  also  of  her 
order  of  salvation.  Justificatio  sola  fide  or  propter  Christum 
per  fidem  is  the  sun  in  the  solar  system  of  Lutheran  doc- 
trine. For  this  reason  it  has  also  been  said  that  justifica- 
tion is  articulus  stantis  et  cadentis  ecclesiae. 

1.    The  Definition  of  Justification. 

Justification  is  the  judicial  act  of  God  by  ivhich  He  sets 
the  believing  sinner  free,  ivhich  act  includes  the  forgiveness 
of  sins  and  the  imputation  of  the  acquired  righteousness  of 
Chii^t  with  the  result  that  man  becomes  a  child  of  God. 
The  definition  of  HOLLAZius  reads  as  follows:*  ''Justificatio 
is  that  act  of  grace  whereby  God,  the  most  just  and  merciful 
judge,  forgives  sinful  man,  subject  to  guilt  and  punishment, 
but  converted  and  regenerated,  out  of  mercy  alone  on  ac- 
count of  the  satisfaction  and  merit  of  Christ,  apprehended 
in  true  faith,  and  imputes  to  him  the  righteousness  of 

*HoLLAzirs:  "Justificatio  est  actus  gratiae.  quo  Deus,  judex  justissi- 
raus  et  misericordissimus,  homini  peccatori,  culpae  et  poense  reo  sed 
converso  et  renato,  ex  mera  misericordia  propter  satisfactionem  et 
meritum  Christi,  vera  fide  apprehensum,  peccata  remittit  et  justitiam 
Christ!  imputat,  ut  in  filium  Dei  adoptatus,  ha?res  sit  vitae  aeternae." 


JUSTIFICATION.  327 

Christ,  so  that  he  becomes  a  child  of  God  and  an  heir  to  life 
eternal."  From  this  definition  it  is  evident  that  Hollazius 
considers  regeneration  a  prius  to  justification  and  there- 
fore as  a  donatio  fidei.  Subjectum  justificationis  according 
to  this  definition  is  the  sinner  as  conversus  et  renatus.  In- 
asmuch as  conversion  or  repentance  consists  in  contrition 
and  faith,  therefore  we  may  say  that  the  subject  of  justi- 
fication is  the  converted  sinner  who  is  both  justified  and 
regenerated  by  faith. 

It  is  God  that  justifies.  Concerning  causae  the  Dogmati- 
cians  say  that  causa  impulsiva  interna  is  the  love  of  God 
and  causa  impulsiva  externa  is  the  merit  of  Christ  alone. 
The  fourth  article  of  the  Augsburg  Confession  clearly  sets 
this  forth:  "Man  cannot  become  righteous  before  God 
through  his  own  strength,  merits  or  deeds,  but  is  declared 
righteous  by  grace  through  faith  for  Christ's  sake." 
Propter  Christum  is  further  explained  in  these  words :  "On 
account  of  the  merit  of  Christ,  who  by  His  death  has  made 
satisfaction  for  our  sins." 

The  ground  of  justification  is,  therefore,  only  the  merit 
of  Christ.  God  could  not  have  justified  man  without  a 
ground  or  foundation.  The  will  of  God  is  revealed  in  His 
Law  and  this  cannot  be  broken.  Satisfaction  had  to  be 
made  and  perfect  obedience  rendered.  In  Adam  we  all 
sinned  and  by  being  implanted  in  the  second  Adam  or 
Christ  we  become  righteous.  A  comparison  is  made  in 
Rom.  5 :  18,  19 :  "So  then  as  through  one  trespass  the  judg- 
ment came  unto  all  men  to  condemnation;  even  so  through 
one  act  of  righteousness  the  free  gift  came  unto  all  men  to 
justification  of  life.  For  as  through  the  one  man's  dis- 
obedience the  many  were  made  sinners,  even  so  through 
the  obedience  of  the  one  shall  the  many  be  made  righteous." 
But  we  must  be  in  the  second  Adam  as  in  the  first.  We 
are  not  righteous  outside  of  Christ,  but,  believing  in  Him, 
His  acquired  righteousness  is  imputed  to  us.  Then  there 
is  no  imputation  of  sin.  Ps.  32 :  1,  2.  The  acquired  right- 
eousness of  Christ,  the  second  Adam,  is  sufficient  to  save 
or  justify  all  the  children  of  the  first  Adam,  but  only  by 


328  PNEUMATOLOGY. 

faith  can  justification  take  place.  Faith  justifies,  not  by 
itself,  but  by  embracing  the  merits  of  Christ.  Justification 
is  the  work  of  God.  When  a  converted  sinner  is  justified, 
it  is  as  if  the  obedience  of  Christ  had  been  rendered  by  the 
man  himself.  The  act  of  justification  is  not,  like  regenera- 
tion, a  work  of  God  within  man,  but  is  an  external  work  in 
the  mind  of  God.  The  effect,  however,  is  experienced  in 
the  heart  of  man.  There  is  nothing  in  us,  as,  e.  g.,  our 
love,  etc.,  which  justifies,  but  we  are  justified  through  faith 
for  Christ's  sake.  The  Bible  verses  in  the  next  paragraph 
show  the  juridical  character  of  justification  and  how  God 
justifies  the  individual. 

Justification  is  a  judicial  or  forensic  act.  The  following 
Scripture  passages  make  this  clear  from  different  points 
of  view.  The  "judge"  is  spoken  of  in  John  5:  27;  Heb. 
12:  23;  the  "judgment-seat"  in  Rom.  14:  10;  Matt.  18:  21 
— 35;  the  "sinner"  or  "criminal"  in  Rom.  3:  19;  Matt.  18: 
24 ;  the  "accuser"  in  John  5 :  45 ;  the  "witness"  in  Rom.  2 : 
15;  the  indictment  or  "bond  written  in  ordinances  against 
us"  in  Col.  2 :  14 ;  the  "debt"  in  Matt.  18 :  24 ;  the  "advocate" 
in  1  John  2 :  1 ;  the  "trial"  in  Isa.  1 :  18 ;  Zech.  5 ;  Matt.  18 : 
24—35 ;  the  "acquittal"  in  Ps.  32 :  1 ;  Isa.  1 :  18 ;  Luke  18 :  14. 

Some  theologians  who  distinguish  sharply  between  the 
general  and  individual  acts  of  justification  will  not  acknowl- 
edge that  the  so-called  individual  justification  is  a  judicial 
act,  only  the  so-called  general  justification  is  such  an  act. 
Many  theologians  who  take  a  mediating  position  on  the 
question  consider  the  individual  justification  in  a  figurative 
sense  and  limit  it  to  a  nova  relatio  mentis  et  voluntatis 
divinse.  Among  their  objections  may  be  mentioned  that 
a  Christian  cannot  be  certain  of  his  justification  if  it  is 
made  contemporaneous  with  the  genesis  of  faith.  It  is 
further  objected  that  the  attribute  iteranda  is  improper  if 
the  individual  justification  is  considered  a  forensic  act. 
Justification  is  considered  by  these  theologians  in  the  fol- 
lowing way:  That  at  the  death  of  Christ  God  pronounced 
the  judgment  of  justification  upon  the  w^hole  race,  and  that 
the  Holy  Ghost  makes  this  known  through  the  Gospel  and 


JUSTIFICATION.  329 

transfers  or  applies  this  judgment  of  acquittal  upon  the 
sinner  at  the  time  of  the  genesis  of  faith.  In  proof  of  the 
general  justification  the  following  passages  are  used:  Rom. 
5:  18,  19;  2  Cor.  5:  21,  etc. 

According  to  this  view,  however,  justification  and  recon- 
ciliation are  apt  to  be  confused  or  identified.  It  is  much 
better  to  keep  them  distinct  and  to  use  the  expression  justi- 
fication exclusively  in  relation  -to  the  application  of  recon- 
ciliation upon  the  individual.  The  objection  that  God  does 
not  act  in  a  judicial  way  in  the  case  of  each  individual  does 
not  hold,  inasmuch  as  the  Word  of  God  clearly  sets  forth 
the  providence  of  God  in  relation  to  the  individual  in  all 
things  and  therefore  with  all  the  greater  emphasis  in  the 
matter  of  salvation.  In  the  application  of  salvation  men 
must  be  justified  as  individuals.  Inasmuch  as  justification 
is  a  forensic  act  of  acquittal,  therefore  God  must  perform 
this  act  in  relation  to  every  believer.  The  divine  act  need 
not  be  considered  in  a  formal  and  human  way,  it  being 
performed  in  a  divine  way  which  harmonizes  with  the 
activity  of  God.  God  enters  into  direct  relationship  with 
each  individual  believer,  forgives  all  his  sins  and  imputes 
to  him  the  righteousness  of  Christ.  There  arises  therefore 
a  judicial  relationship  between  God  and  the  penitent  sin- 
ner, who  through  faith  for  Christ's  sake  is  adjudged 
righteous. 

Terminus  a  quo  in  justification  is  the  state  of  man  as 
deserving  of  the  wrath  and  punishment  of  God  not  only  in 
time,  but  subject  also  to  the  eternal  punishments,  both  the 
privative  and  positive,  which  in  a  forensic  way  are  removed 
through  justification.  Terminus  ad  quern  is  justitia  im- 
putativa. 

2.    The  Acts  or  Parts  of  Justification. 

According  to  the  definition  of  justification  it  involves  two 
principal  acts  or  parts:  1)  The  negative  or  the  forgiveness 
of  sins,  which  corresponds  to  or  is  based  upon  Christ's 
obedientia  passiva.  2)  The  positive  or  the  imputation  of 
Christ's  righteousness,  which  is  based  on  obedientia  activa. 


330  PNEUAIATOLOGY. 

However,  the  forgiveness  of  sins  and  the  imputation  of 
Christ's  righteousness  are  not  fundamentally  distinct,  there 
is  merely  a  logical  difference  between  them.  Cf.  Rom.  4. 
Still  while  they  imply  the  same  thing,  they  are  nevertheless 
of  importance  and  together  express  the  significance  of  jus- 
tification. For  this  reason  the  one  act  without  the  other 
would  not  adequately  express  the  content  of  justification. 
No  one  can  receive  the  forgiveness  of  sins  without  the  im- 
putation of  Christ's  righteousness,  while  he  that  has  been 
declared  righteous  for  Christ's  sake  has  likewise  received 
the  forgiveness  of  sins.  These  acts  are  therefore  not  ex- 
actly identical,  but  constitute  two  sides  of  the  same  thing. 
In  one  sense  we  may  say  that  justification  stands  in  a 
superior  relationship  to  the  forgiveness  of  sins,  inasmuch 
as  sins  are  forgiven  propter  imputationem  justitiae  Christi. 

The  two  acts  or  parts  are  necessary  because  human  guilt 
implies  accountability  and  indebtedness  and  obligation  to 
fulfill  the  Law.  It  is  not  sufficient  that  the  punishment  is 
remitted ;  man  is  also  obliged  to  fulfill  the  Law\  If  he  there- 
fore received  the  forgiveness  of  his  sins,  he  would  never- 
theless feel  his  obligation  to  fulfill  the  Law,  while  his  in- 
ability to  fulfill  the  Law  would  become  a  burden  and  the 
Law  itself  a  yoke  to  cause  him  grief.  But  from  this  con- 
dition man  is  liberated  when  he  is  adjudged  righteous 
through  the  imputed  righteousness  of  Christ. 

The  righteousness  that  is  imputed  is  not  the  essential 
righteousness  of  Christ,  but  that  righteousness  acquired  or 
procured  through  His  active  and  passive  obedience.  The 
term  "imputed"  must  be  emphasized  in  order  that  the  word 
justificatio  may  be  understood,  according  to  its  etymology, 
as  the  act  of  making  righteous.  Justificatio  or  justificare 
is  compounded  of  Justus  and  facere,  but  in  Scripture  it 
does  not  mean  to  make  righteous  or  pious  or  to  infuse  an 
habitual  righteousness.  Hitzdiq  and  SiKacovv  always  have  a 
forensic  sense. 

Among  Scripture  passages  may  be  mentioned:  "That 
justify  the  wicked"  (Isa.  5:  23)  ;  "Enter  not  into  judgment 
with  thy  servant;  for  in  thy  sight  no  man  living  is  right- 


JUSTIFICATION.  331 

eous"  (Ps.  143:  2);  "This  man  went  down  to  his  house 
justified"  (Luke  18:  14)  ;  "And  by  him  every  one  that  be- 
lieveth  is  justified  from  all  things,  from  that  which  ye  could 
not  be  by  the  law  of  Moses"  (Acts  13 :  39)  ;  "Shall  be 
justified"  or,  "accounted  righteous"  (marginal  reading) 
(Rom.  2:  13)  ;  "Being  justified  freely  by  his  grace  through 
the  redemption  that  is  in  Christ  Jesus"  (Rom.  3:  24): 
"Believeth  on  him  that  justifieth  the  ungodly,  his  faith  is 
reckoned  for  righteousness"  (Rom.  4:  5;  cf.  4:  7;  5:  18)  ; 
"It  is  God  that  justifieth"  (Rom.  8:  33;  cf.  1  Cor.  4:4; 
Gal.  2:  16;  3:  8,  11,  etc.).  Concerning  the  two  acts  com- 
pare especially  Rom.  4 :  5—8 ;  2  Cor.  5 :  19—21 ;  Eph.  1 :  7. 
"God  also  in  Christ  forgave  you"  (Eph.  4:  32;  Col.  2:  13; 
3:  13,  etc.). 

3.    The  Means  of  Justification. 

Media  justificationis  are  divided  into  media  SortKa  and 
medium  Xi/tttikoV.  The  former  are  the  Gospel  and  the  Sacra- 
ments ;  the  latter  is  faith.  Fides  or  faith  is  also  called  causa 
impulsiva  minus  principalis.  With  regard  to  faith  the  fol- 
lowing expressions  are  also  used:  Sola  fide,  per  fidem,  non 
propter'  fidem,  sed  propter  Christum. 

On  the  divine  side  the  means  are  the  Word  and  the  Sacra- 
ments, which  are  carriers  or  vehicles  of  the  grace  of  justi- 
fication. The  objective  foundation  of  justification  is  to  be 
found  in  the  satisfaction  of  Christ,  but  on  the  human  side 
there  is  necessary  a  subjective  condition  which  man  must 
fulfill  in  order  to  become  partaker  of  the  grace  of  salvation. 
This  condition  is  faith,  which  is  a  medium  receptivum. 
But  faith  is  the  work  of  God.  However,  faith  is  engendered 
in  such  a  way  that  human  freedom  suffers  no  infraction; 
it  is  man  that  believes.  And  yet  there  is  no  merit  in  man's 
faith  which  might  be  construed  to  mean  that  faith  is  also 
a  foundation  for  justification  in  addition  to  the  satisfaction 
of  Christ.  Faith  is  receptive  like  a  mouth  or  a  hand.  It 
is  therefore  not  a  faith  engendered  according  to  the  Cath- 
olic or  the  Reformed  conception.  Faith  does  not  justify 
through  itself,  but  on  the  ground  of  that  which  faith  ap- 


332  PXEUMATOLOGY. 

propriates.  It  is  therefore  not  the  ethical  content  of  faith 
that  justifies.  Faith  is  reckoned  for  righteousness  because 
it  embraces  Christ,  who  was  delivered  up  for  our  trespasses, 
and  was  raised  for  our  justification.  Compare  Rom.  4:  22 
— 25.  As  a  receptive  means  faith  is  therefore  like  a  hand 
that  receives  bread.  The  figure  of  a  glass  containing  a  re- 
freshing drink  has  also  been  used  as  an  illustration.  By 
metonymy  we  say  that  the  glass  assuages  the  thirst,  while 
it  is  the  contents  of  the  glass  that  produce  the  effect.  Still 
the  glass  possesses  great  significance  as  a  means.  In  case 
the  draught  could  not  be  obtained  in  any  other  way  the 
figure  would  be  still  more  apt.  Faith  as  the  only  medium 
receptivum  in  justification  is  of  the  utmost  significance,  but 
it  is  the  object  of  faith  that  constitutes  the  foundation  of 
justification.  We  therefore  say  that  we  are  justified  per 
fidem,  not  propter  fidem,  but  propter  Christum.  Compare 
Rom.  3 :  24,  25 :  ''Being  justified  freely  by  his  grace  through 
the  redemption  that  is  in  Christ  Jesus :  whom  God  set  forth 
to  be  a  propitiation  through  faith."  Faith  is  therefore 
reckoned  unto  righteousness  for  Christ's  sake.  Also  Rom. 
10:  4 — 10,  where  it  is  stated  that  Christ  is  the  end  of  the 
law  unto  righteousness.  It  is  not  necessary  to  run  hither  and 
thither  to  find  Christ,  He  is  present  in  the  Word  which  we 
preach.  Whoever  receives  the  Word  in  true  faith  also  pos- 
sesses the  Lord  Jesus  Christ  unto  righteousness.  This  justi- 
fying faith  may  not  always  correspond  to  the  ideal  faith, 
indeed,  in  the  majority  of  instances  it  may  lack  the  heroic 
character  of  the  faith  of  Abraham ;  but  ev«n  if  it  be  weak, 
it  is  nevertheless  a  justifying  faith,  provided  only  it  be 
true  faith.  Justification  is  equal  and  without  degrees.  The 
greatest  saints,  such  as  Abraham,  the  Virgin  Mary,  Paul  or 
Luther,  are  not  more  justified  than  the  poorest  sinner  who 
trusts  in  the  merits  of  Christ.  We  are  equally  justified, 
whether  our  faith  be  weak  or  strong. 

The  Lutheran  Church  defines  the  conditions  of  justifica- 
tion not  only  by  the  term  per  fidem,  but  also  by  sola  fide. 
We  are  justified  by  faith  alone,  not  by  love  which  deter- 
mines faith,  nor  by  any  deed.     This  does  not  mean  that 


JUSTIFICATION.  333 

faith  is  inactive,  for  the  newness  of  life  follows  upon  faith, 
but  this  newness  of  life  is  not  the  cause  of  justification,  it 
is  one  of  its  fruits.  Faith  alone  justifies  on  the  ground  of 
the  merit  of  Christ,  which  it  apprehends.  But  faith  is  not 
barren,  it  is  followed  by  deeds  as  the  fruits  of  faith.  The 
reason  that  the  word  ''sola"  is  used  instead  of  the  particulse 
exclusivse  of  the  Bible  is  that  this  word  implies  all  that  is 
contained  in  the  others. 

In  this  connection  we  would  point  out  the  apparent 
though  unreal  difference  between  the  doctrines  of  Paul  and 
James  concerning  faith  and  good  works  in  their  relation  to 
the  conception  of  justification.  Compare  James  2:  14 — 26. 
By  faith  alone  James  means  a  fides  solitaria,  a  dead  faith, 
and  therefore  a  faith  that  bears  no  fruit.  He  endeavors  to 
establish  that  a  living  faith  is  necessary,  as  Paul  also  does 
when  he  says  in  Gal.  5:6:  "Faith  working  through  love." 
Cf .  James  2 :  22 :  "By  works  was  faith  made  perfect."  By 
deeds  James  means  the  deeds  of  faith,  the  life  or  fruits  of 
faith,  while  Paul  speaks  in  this  connection  of  the  deeds  of 
the  Law.  Paul  argues  against  self-righteousness  and  pre- 
sents the  genesis  of  justification  through  faith  alone,  while 
James  argues  against  laxity  in  the  observance  of  the  Law 
together  with  antinomism,  at  the  same  time  stressing  the 
fact  that  justification  proves  its  genuineness  in  the  Chris- 
tian life.  Compare  1  Cor.  6:  9 — 11.  Paul  and  James  there- 
fore had  the  same  doctrinal  position.  In  the  determination 
and  fixation  of  doctrinal  presentations  we  must  study  Scrip- 
ture in  the  light  of  the  analogy  of  faith,  so  that  the  clear 
passages  may  shed  light  on  the  obscure  passages  and  not 
vice  versa. 

4.    The  Attributes  of  Justification. 

The  attributes  ascribed  to  justification  are  the  following: 
1)  gratuita,  since  justification  is  by  grace;  2)  sequalis,  or 
without  degrees ;  3)  ^^er/ec^a,  or  perfect ;  4)  ceria,  because 
justification  is  certain;  5)  iteranda  et  continuenda,  since 
justification  is  renewed  and  continued  day  by  day.  The 
Christian  daily  confesses  his  sins  and  receives  absolution; 


334  PNEUMATOLOGY. 

6)  amissibilis  et  restaurahilis ,  because  it  is  possible  for  man 
to  fall,  but  he  may  also  be  restored  and  again  made  partaker 
of  the  grace  of  justification. 

Justification  is  not  a  process  that  continues  throughout 
life,  it  takes  place  all  at  once  when  the  penitent  sinner  ap- 
prehends the  merit  of  Christ.  The  terms  iteranda  et  con- 
tinuenda  do  not  denote  a  continuous  process  of  justification, 
but  simply  set  forth  that  justification  can  be  renewed  and 
that  the  believer  lives  always  in  the  enjoyment  of  the  grace 
of  justification.  Justification,  therefore,  is  a  momentary 
and  real  forensic  act  whose  power  and  influence  continue 
as  long  as  a  person  remains  a  true  Christian.  A  true  Chris- 
tian lives  in  daily  penitence,  while  God  forgives  him  daily 
and  abundantly  all  his  sins  and  considers  him  as  clothed  in 
the  righteousness  of  Christ.  Thus  Paul  in  Rom.  8 :  1 : 
"There  is  therefore  now  no  condemnation  to  them  that  are 
in  Christ  Jesus."  Justification  possesses  no  grades  so  that 
one  Christian  may  be  said  to  be  more  justified  than  an- 
other; neither  does  justification  vary  with  the  varying 
subjective  states  of  the  believer.  Justification  is  always 
perfect. 

5.    The  Purpose  and  Effect  of  Justification. 

Finis  jicstificationis  in  relation  to  the  justified  person  is 
eternal  salvation ;  in  relation  to  God  it  is  His  eternal  glory. 

Effectus  justificationis  are:  1)  Liberation  from  the  sense 
of  guilt  and  the  fear  of  punishment,  which  means  peace  of 
conscience;  "Being  therefore  justified  by  faith,  we  have 
peace  with  God  through  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ"  (Rom. 
5:1);  2)  sonship  and  communion  with  God;  "But  as  many 
as  received  him,  to  them  gave  he  the  right  to  become  chil- 
dren of  God,  even  to  them  that  believe  on  his  name"  (John 
1 :  12)  ;  "That  Christ  may  dwell  in  your  hearts  through 
faith"  (Eph.  3:  17)  ;  3)  the  gift  of  the  Holy  Ghost;  "The 
Spirit  of  God  dwelleth  in  you"  (1  Cor.  3:  16)  ;  "The  Spirit 
himself  beareth  witness  with  our  spirit"  (Rom.  8 :  16)  ; 
4)  renewal;  "Be  ye  renewed  in  the  spirit  of  your  mind" 
(Eph.  4:  23)  ;   5)  assurance  that  God  answers  prayer  and 


JUSTIFICATIOX.  335 

grants  us  all  good  things;  "The  supplication  of  a  righteous 
man  availeth  much  in  its  working"  (James  5:  16;  cf. 
James  1:5);  "If  we  know  that  he  heareth  us  whatsoever 
we  ask,  we  know  that  we  have  the  petitions  which  we  have 
asked  of  him"  (1  John  5:  15)  ;  "How  shall  he  not  also  with 
him  freely  give  us  all  things"  (Rom.  8 :  32)  ;  6)  the  hope 
of  everlasting  life;  "That,  being  justified  by  his  grace,  we 
might  be  made  heirs  according  to  the  hope  of  eternal  life" 
(Titus  3:7). 

6.    Notes  on  the  History  of  Dogma. 

The  doctrine  of  justification  did  not  become  fixed  dog- 
matically either  during  the  period  of  the  Apostolic  Fathers 
or  during  the  Apologetic  period.  The  formulation  of  the 
dogma,  begun  during  the  Polemical  period,  took  a  trend  in 
opposition  to  the  Biblical  presentation.  The  doctrinal  views 
of  Augustine  became  the  dominating  force  in  the  Church. 
His  doctrine  of  faith  as  determined  by  love  together  with 
his  conception  of  justification  as  a  transforming  process 
extending  throughout  the  whole  of  life  formed  the  basis  of 
the  theology  of  the  Middle  Ages.  Thomas  Aquinas  adhered 
to  the  theological  conceptions  of  Augustine,  but  differed 
from  him  in  the  doctrine  of  human  freedom.  His  doctrine 
of  meritum  does  not  agree  with  Augustinianism.  The 
Scotists  fought  the  Thomists,  but  their  decided  Semi- 
Pelagianism  did  not  lead  them  into  the  right  current  and 
they  continued  in  the  same  direction.  With  few  exceptions 
the  general  opinion  was  that  faith  justifies  on  the  ground 
of  love.  The  next  step  was  entirely  natural,  that  man  is 
justified  through  faith  and  works.  The  Council  of  Trent 
definitely  formulated  the  Roman  conception.  Justification 
was  defined  by  the  Council  as  consisting  not  only  in  the 
forgiveness  of  sins,  but  also  in  sanctification  and  renova- 
tion, indeed  as  a  justitia  infusa.  It  was  taught  that  this 
justitia  infusa  could  be  increased  by  obedience  to  the  com- 
mandments of  God  and  the  Church.  The  good  works  of 
man  are  meritorious.  Righteousness  is  maintained  through 
daily  growth  and  increase. 


336  PNEUMATOLOGY. 

The  doctrine  of  justification  by  faith  alone  in  accordance 
with  the  Lutheran  presentation  indicated  a  return  to  the 
Pauhne  doctrine  and  became  the  principle  of  a  Scriptural 
formulation  of  doctrine.  The  fourth  article  of  the  Augs- 
burg Confession  declares:  "That  men  cannot  be  justified 
before  God  by  their  own  strength,  merits  or  works,  but  are 
freely  justified  for  Christ's  sake  through  faith,  when  they 
believe  that  they  are  forgiven  for  Christ's  sake,  who,  by 
His  death,  hath  made  satisfaction  for  our  sins.  This  faith 
God  imputes  for  righteousness  in  His  sight."  The  Re- 
formed Church  speaks  of  grace,  the  forgiveness  of  sins 
and  justification,  but  their  presentation  lays  stress  on  the 
words  rather  than  the  matter,  as  can  be  seen  by  comparing 
the  Reformed  views  with  the  Lutheran  doctrine.  The  doc- 
trine of  justification  does  not  possess  prime  significance  for 
the  Reformed  Church.  She  considers  justification  not  so 
much  a  liberation  from  the  guilt  and  punishment  of  sin  or 
an  imputation  of  the  righteousness  of  Christ,  as  rather  a 
salvation  in  general  and  the  means  of  removing  the  misery 
of  sin.  In  this  manner  she  confuses  justification  with 
regeneration.  She  uses  the  same  terminology  as  the  Lu- 
theran Church,  but  not  with  the  same  fixed  meaning.  There 
are  some  tendencies  in  the  Reformed  Church  that  approach 
more  nearly  the  Catholic  than  the  Lutheran  position.  The 
Arminians  rejected  the  doctrine  of  the  imputation  of 
Christ's  righteousness  and  held  that  justification  consisted 
in  the  forgiveness  of  sins  and  the  cancellation  of  the 
punishment. 

The  Rationalists,  of  course,  rejected  the  doctrine  of  the 
Church  and  declared  that  justification  consisted  in  the  good- 
will and  favor  of  God,  when  satisfied  with  our  change  of 
heart  and  mind.  Philosophical  Rationalism  and  other  re- 
lated theories  embraced  similar  views  and  laid  emphasis 
on  the  ability  of  man.  The  mediating  theologians  presented 
principally  a  doctrine  of  subjective  justification.  They 
emphasized  the  proposition,  Christ  in  us,  rather  than  Christ 
for  us.  Beck  and  his  disciples  taught  that  justification  was 
a  process  and  therefore  he  did  not  accept  the  Church  doc- 


JUSTIFICATION.  337 

trine  of  the  imputation  of  Christ's  righteousness.  Ritsch- 
lianism  naturally  rejects  the  orthodox  doctrine,  lays  em- 
phasis on  sanctification  rather  than  justification  and  denies 
individual  justification  in  a  real  sense.  The  conservative 
Lutheran  doctrine  of  justification  has  many  powerful  cham- 
pions, but  the  formulation  of  the  doctrine  seems  to  be  fixed, 
and  the  confessional  theologians  in  their  presentation  pay 
more  particular  attention  to  the  material  content.  We  now 
pass  to  the  more  detailed  consideration  of  the  development 
of  the  doctrine  together  with  the  views  of  the  leading 
thinkers  during  the  various  periods. 

Clement  of  Rome  taught  that  we  are  not  justified  through  ourselves, 
but  by  faith.  He  also  speaks,  however,  of  the  forgiveness  of  sins 
through  love.  JrsTix  Maktyk  said  that  sins  are  blotted  out  through 
faith  and  not  through  the  sacrifices  of  animals  or  meal  offerings.  Just 
as  the  blood  of  the  Paschal  Lamb  saved  the  Israelites,  so  the  blood 
of  Christ  saves  us  from  death.  Iren.eus  compares  our  faith  with  that 
of  Abraham  and  says  that  man  is  justified  through  the  revelation  of,; 
the  Lord  when  he  turns  to  the  light  of  His  countenance.  Tertullian 
taught  that  man  is  justified  through  the  freedom  of  faith  and  not 
through  the  bondage  of  the  Law,  since  the  just  shall  live  by  his  faith. 
Clement  of  Alexandria  taught  that  we  become  the  children  of  God 
through  faith.  He  said  that  the  sins  committed  before  Baptism  are 
blotted  out  or  forgiven  through  Baptism,  but  that  after  Baptism  for- 
giveness is  received  through  penances.  From  this  it  can  be  seen  that 
such  a  view  would  prevent  him  from  having  a  correct  conception  of 
justification.  In  certain  places  Orioen  states  that  justification  takes 
place  through  faith  without  works,  in  other  places  he  contradicts  him- 
self and  seems  to  teach  that  justification  begins  with  faith  and  is 
completed  with  good  works. 

Ambrose  had  a  very  clear  conception  of  justification.  He  speaks  of 
forgiveness,  the  non-imputation  of  sins  and  justification  as  being 
the  same.  He  refers  justification  to  faith  alone  and  not  to  love. 
Augx'stine  performed  a  great  service  in  the  development  of  the  doc- 
trine when  he  taught  that  all  is  hy  prace.  but  he  obscured  the  meaning 
of  these  words  in  his  definition  of  justification.  He  taught  that  grace 
works  faith,  which  is  the  foundation  of  the  moral  change.  Love  is 
infused.  Through  it  faith  becomes  an  active  principle  and  man 
becomes  righteous.  The  absolute  predestination  of  God  is  the  ground 
of  justification.  Justification  is  justum  facere.  It  is  a  process  that 
extends  to  the  whole  life  and  activity  of  man.  Faith  is  justifying  as 
determined  by  the  love  that  is  infused. 

Anselm  had   an   evangelical   conception  of  the   doctrine   and   in  his 

Dogmatics.     12. 


338  r\F:i:.\rATOi.o{;Y. 

admonitions  to  the  dying  he  set  forth  the  death  of  Christ,  to  whom 
they  were  told  to  turn  in  faith.  Thomas  Aqi'I-nas  taught  that  justifi- 
cation consisted  of  the  following  parts:  1)  An  infusion  of  the  grace 
of  God;  2)  the  inclination  of  the  will  to  God  in  faith;  3)  the  turning 
away  of  the  will  from  sin;  4)  the  forgiveness  of  sins.  Justification 
is  not  a  forensic  act,  it  consists  of  an  infusion  of  righteousness.  In 
agreement  with  Augustine  he  considered  that  justification  is  a  process 
that  continues  throughout  life.  Bo.xavk.ntika  indeed  taught  that  justi- 
fication is  a  justitia  infusa,  but  he  speaks  of  faith  as  a  foundation  for 
the  whole  of  the  Christian  life  and  as  a  ladder  that  reaches  to  heaven. 
Bkkmiaki)  ok  Claikvaix  stated  that  justification  consists  in  the  for- 
giveness of  sins.  He  speaks  of  justification  by  faith  alone,  although 
at  times  he  seems  to  confuse  the  conceptions  of  justification  and 
sanctification.  The  Catholic  mystics,  such  as  Srso,  Gock.  Wicliffk 
and  others,  to  a  greater  or  less  degree  advocated  the  doctrine  of 
justitia  infusa  and  regarded  justification  as  subjective.  Even  Joh.x 
OF  Weski,  speaks  of  justitia  infusa,  but  Savoxakoi.a  and  Joiix  Wks.ski. 
came  closer  to  the  evangelical  conception. 

LrrnKii.  the  Paul  of  the  Reformation  period,  clearly  presents  th3 
doctrine  of  justification  by  faith  alone.  Justification  is  an  act  of  God 
outside  of  us  and  consists  of  the  forgiveness  of  sins  together  with  the 
imputation  of  the  righteousness  of  Christ.  The  foundation  of  justifica- 
tion is  the  work  and  suffering  of  Christ  in  our  stead.  Faith  justifies 
because  it  embraces  Christ.  He  that  embraces  Christ  in  faith  God  con- 
siders as  righteous,  etc.  The  Lutheran  position,  as  set  forth  in  the 
Augsburg  Confession,  IV,  V  and  XX,  was  attacked  in  the  Roman  Con- 
futation.  The  Confutation  states  that  the  Lutheran  doctrine  of  sola  fide 
conflicts  absolutely  with  the  Word  of  God.  The  Apology  in  a  masterly 
way  defends  the  position  of  the  Lutheran  Church  on  the  doctrine  of 
justification.  It  confutes  the  Roman  doctrine  of  good  works  and  proves 
that  justifying  faith  does  not  consist  in  fides  historica  and  good  works, 
but  is  a  fides  apprehensiva;  also  it  presents  faith  as  accepting  the 
promise  that  God  graciously  forgives  the  sinner  for  Christ's  sake.  By 
reason  of  the  powerful  defense  of  the  doctrine  of  justification  set  forth 
by  the  Reformers,  the  Catholics  were  compelled  to  accord  very  great 
attention  to  this  doctrine  at  the  Council  of  Trent.*  This  Council 
decided  that  justification  is  a  process  that  develops  and  continues 
through  three  principal  stages.  The  first  stage  in  this  process  of 
development  is  the  so-called  preparation.  This  beginning  of  the  process 
of  justification  is  dependent  on  the  prevenient  grace  of  God.  The 
synergistic  tendency  of  the  Council  is  here  plainly  evident,  although 
in  practice  the  Catholic  Church  is  Semi-Pelagian.  The  preparation 
works  an  historical  faith  (fides  historica)  together  with  a  fear  because 
of  sin,  but  coupled  with  a  knowledge  of  grace.     This  results  in  love 

*  Sessio  VI. 


.TUSTIFICATIOX.  339 

and  the  resolution  to  repent.  Thereafter  the  second  stage  of  the 
process  begins,  or  justification  proper,  which  does  not  consist  merely 
in  the  forgiveness  of  sins,  but  also  in  sanctification  and  in  the  renewal 
of  the  inner  man.  Love  is  infused  and  is  made  secure.  Justification 
is  a  justitia  infusa.  Hereafter  follows  the  third  stage  in  which 
righteousness  is  to  be  daily  increased,  and  by  which  righteousness  or 
justification  is  to  be  preserved.  To  this  end  there  occurs  the  co- 
operation of  good  works.  In  Canon  IX  de  justificatione  all  those  are 
condemned  who  teach  justification  by  faith  alone  and  in  Canon  XXIV 
those  are  condemned  that  deny  that  justification  is  increased  and 
preserved  through  good  works.  The  Reformed  theologians,  such  as 
ZwiNGLi.  Calvix  and  Oecolampadius,  were  not  able  on  account  of  their 
doctrine  of  predestination  to  conceive  of  justification  as  clearly  as 
Luther  did.  The  Reformed  Church  looks  upon  justification  as  a  dogma 
alongside  of  other  dogmas.  Justification  is  the  carrying  out  of  the 
absolute  decree  of  predestination.  The  declaration  of  justification 
which  follows  upon  faith  is  the  declaration  to  the  individual  that  he 
is  elect,  becoming  a  sort  of  assurance  and  certainty.  The  expressions 
propter  Christum,  per  fidevi  and  sola  fide  are  used  by  the  Reformed 
theologians,  but  they  do  not  have  the  same  meaning  as  in  the  Lutheran 
theology.  In  accordance  with  the  Reformed  position  it  would  seem 
that  one  could  say:  justificamur  propter  fidem  per  Christum,  and  also: 
propter  Christum  per  fidem.  This  Church  declares  that  all  is  by  gracs 
in  the  same  sense  as  Augustine  did.  They  emphasize  per  fidem  et 
sola  fide  as  over  against  the  Catholic  doctrine  of  good  works.  Faith 
justifies  because  it  places  us  in  a  living  relationship  with  Christ.  The 
conceptions  of  regeneration  and  justification  are  confused.  Justifica- 
tion possesses  a  subjective  character.  The  Reformed  conception  of 
faith  and  their  doctrine  of  justification  are  more  nearly  related  to  tho 
Catholic  position  than  the  Lutheran.  Their  conception  of  faith  is 
similar  to  fides  formata,  while  justification  occupies  a  subordinate 
position.  However,  there  is  this  difference,  that  the  Reformed  Church 
does  not  accept  the  Catholic  doctrine  of  justification  per  fidem  caritate 
formata.  They  do  not  teach  that  man  is  justified  by  faith  and  good 
works,  but  present  the  grace  of  God  in  Christ  Jesus.  According  to  the 
Reformed  view  faith  does  not  justify  as  a  principle  of  good  works,  but 
by  reason  of  the  fact  that  faith  embraces  Christ  as  a  principle  of  life. 
For  this  reason  Christ  is  conceived  of  more  as  a  redeemer  and  not  so 
much  as  a  propitiator.  Man  is  justified  because  he  stands  in  living 
relationship  with  Christ,  and  not  so  much  because  through  faith  he 
apprehends  the  merit  of  Christ.  Osiander  taught  that  Christ  is  our 
righteousness  not  through  the  righteousness  which  He  has  procured 
for  us,  but  by_  reason  of  the  fact  that  as  the  Son  of  God  He  dwells  in 
us  through  faith  in  His  essential  righteousness.     Staxcarus  based  his 

*  Sessio  VI,  Caput  X. 


340  r.xKrMATOi.ooY. 

view  of  the  righteousness  of  Christ  on  the  obedience  of  Christ  in 
accordance  with  the  human  nature  only,  while  Osiander  emphasized 
the  divine  nature.  The  Formula  of  Concord  sets  forth  clearly  the 
position  of  the  Lutheran  Church.  In  Epitome  3  there  are  many  posi- 
tive and  negative  points.  We  herewith  present  an  extract  of  the 
positive  points:  1)  Christ  is  our  righteousness  in  accordance  with 
both  natures;  2)  our  righteousness  before  God  consists  in  the  fact 
that  God  by  grace  alone  without  reference  to  past,  present  or  future 
deeds  forgives  us  all  our  sins  and  imputes  to  us  the  righteousness  of 
Christ;  3)  faith  is  the  only  means  by  which  we  apprehend  Christ; 
4)  faith  is  not  historical  knowledge,  but  assent  and  confidence;  5)  to 
justify  is  the  same  as  to  absolve  and  declare  free  from  sin;  6)  the 
righteousness  that  is  imputed  through  faith  is  not  to  be  doubted ; 
7)  the  particulae  exclusivae,  such  as,  without  merit,  by  grace,  without 
works,  etc.,  are  to  be  retained;  8)  although  the  antecedent  contrition 
and  the  consequent  newness  of  life  are  not  a  part  of  justification,  still 
the  true  and  living  faith  is  active  through  love,  and  good  works  always 
follow  after  the  living  faith.  The  Mystics,  such  as  Weigel  and 
SciiwEXKFELD,  together  with  others  presented  a  subjective  doctrine  of 
justification  which  made  of  the  latter  a  continuous  internal  life  process. 
The  Socinians  acknowledged  that  justification  takes  place  through 
faith,  but  that  it  merely  implies  the  remission  of  the  punishment  of 
sin  and  not  the  imputation  of  the  righteousness  of  Christ.  The 
Arminians  took  the  same  position  and  taught  that  justification  con- 
sisted merely  in  the  forgiveness  of  sins,  especially  the  remission  of 
punishment.    They  rejected  the  positive  element. 

Kant  and  the  moral  Rationalists,  of  course,  did  not  accept  the  Church 
doctrine  of  justification.  By  justification  they  meant  that  what  is 
effected  here  on  earth  to  make  us  well  pleasing  to  God  is  credited  to 
our  account  in  advance,  so  that  we  are  now  considered  as  already 
possessing  it.  However,  all  takes  place  in  our  own  subjective  con- 
sciousness. Rationalism,  as  set  forth  by  Wegscheider.  rejects  faith 
in  the  historical  facts  of  salvation  and  presents  an  intellectual  faith. 
The  doctrine  of  justification  is  the  fruit  of  an  uncultured  age.  The 
only  truth  that  it  contains  is  that  God  does  not  scrutinize  our  separate 
acts  but  only  our  state  of  mind  and  for  this  reason  grants  us  His 
favor.  In  accordance  with  the  views  of  Sc•nr,EIEK.^rACI^El{  justification 
is  identical  with  the  living  union  with  Christ.  The  negative  element 
in  justification  is  the  forgiveness  of  sins;  the  positive  element  is  the 
adoption  of  believers  as  the  children  of  God.  He  rejected  the  doctrine 
of  the  imputation  of  Christ's  merit.  A  powerful  consciousness  of  God 
is  infused  in  man,  which  is  considered  by  God  as  being  perfect,  al- 
though here  in  time  it  is  imperfect.  J.  T.  Beck  did  not  consider  justi- 
fication as  a  momentary  forensic  act,  but  as  a  process  that  continues 
throughout  life.     He  resembled   Osiander   in   this  that  he   considered 


JUSTIFICATION.  341 

righteousness  as  essentially  indwelling  in  man.  In  this  process  of 
justification  God  deals  with  man  in  a  prophetic,  regal  and  priestly  way. 
The  call  belongs  to  the  first  stage.  The  kingly  judgment  consists  in 
this  that  God  declares  the  sinner  righteous,  not  because  he  in  faith 
accepts  a  valid  external  righteousness,  but  because  through  faith  man 
reaches  a  condition  that  God  requires  for  a  proper  reception  of  grace. 
Thereupon  follows  the  priestly  work  which  is  purifying  in  its  effect 
by  reason  of  the  indwelling  righteousness.  According  to  Beck's  presen- 
tation justification  includes  the  whole  order  of  salvation.  However,  the 
forgiveness  of  sins  and  the  adoption  enter  into  justification  as  special 
elements.  He  states  that  the  forgiveness  of  sins  is  not  a  forensic  act, 
but  an  act  of  grace.  Hengstenueug  also  conceived  of  justification  as  a 
gradually  developing  process.  Many  others  could  be  cited.  Martensen 
says  that  faith  justifies  like  an  ethical  principle.  He  does  not  conceive 
of  justification  as  being  purely  objective.  He  presents  Christ  in  us 
just  as  strongly  as  Christ  outside  of  us  or  for  us.  Ritschl  places 
justification  above  reconciliation  and  sanctification  above  justification. 
He  denies  justification  in  the  real  individual  sense.  As  the  correlative 
of  redemption  and  justification  we  are  not  to  think  of  the  Individual 
man,  but  of  the  Christian  Church  in  her  entirety.  W.  HERRiiAN,  a 
prominent  disciple  of  Ritschl,  emphasized  more  than  Ritschl  the  separa- 
tion of  religion  from  metaphysical  questions.  Although  he  connects 
closely  the  religious  and  moral,  he  does  not  look  upon  religion  as  a 
postulate  of  morality.  In  Sweden  Fr.  Fehr  was  an  influential  disciple 
of  Ritschl.  Granfei.t  sets  forth  that  through  faith  man  is  transplanted 
from  sinful  ground  to  become  a  branch  in  the  vine  of  Christ's  right- 
eousness. The  righteousness  of  Christ  is  imputed  to  the  man  who  has 
experienced  not  only  Christ  for  us,  but  Christ  in  us.  This  imputation 
takes  place  by  way  of  anticipation  and  becomes  a  declaration  of  right- 
eousness in  advance. 

Many  citations  could  be  made  from  the  dogmatic  works  of  the  con- 
fessional theologians  and  other  sources,  but  there  are  so  many  that  it 
would  be  difficult  to  make  a  selection.  Frank  in  Germany  (and  many 
with  him)  have  powerfully  opposed  Ritschlianism.  Many  theologians 
in  Sweden  have  refuted  the  same  tendency.  The  doctrine  of  justifica- 
tion as  set  forth  by  Beck  has  also  been  the  object  of  critical  treatment 
and  confutation.  The  controversies  concerning  this  important  doctrine 
have  served  to  establish  the  old  Lutheran  position  and  the  confessional 
dogmatic  development. 


342  r.NEUMATOI.OGY. 


528.     REGENERATION. 


Justification  and  regeneration  stand  in  the  closest  rela- 
tion to  each  other.  The  terminology  has  not  always  been 
the  same,  but  has  been  changed  from  time  to  time,  while 
the  subject  matter  concerned  has  always  been  fixed.  We 
have  already  called  attention  to  the  fact  that  different 
presentations  have  been  made  by  different  theologians  of 
our  Church,  and  opinions  are  still  divided,  but  everything 
depends  on  a  good  interpreter,  i.  e.,  if  we  understand  the 
definition  correctly,  clarity  and  order  will  ensue.  The 
Formula  of  Concord  speaks  of  different  definitions  of  re- 
generation.* We  quote  the  following:  "The  word  regenera- 
tion is  sometimes  understood  in  the  sense  that  it  includes 
both  the  forgiveness  of  sins,  which  is  experienced  for 
Christ's  sake  alone,  and  renovation,  which  the  Holy  Spirit 
works  in  those  that  are  justified  by  faith.  At  times  it 
signifies  the  forgiveness  of  sins  alone  and  the  adoption  as 
the  sons  of  God.  In  the  latter  sense  it  is  very  often  found 
in  the  Apology.  As  for  example  when  it  is  stated:  'Justi- 
fication is  regeneration.'  But  Paul  also  makes  a  distinction 
between  these  words  when  he  says  in  Titus  3:5:  'According 
to  his  mercy  he  saved  us  through  the  washing  of  regenera- 
tion and  renewing  of  the  Holy  Spirit.'  The  word  'vivifying' 
(vivificatio)  is  therefore  sometimes  used  to  signify  the  for- 
giveness of  sins.  For  since  man  is  justified  through  faith, 
which  the  Holy  Spirit  alone  works,  it  certainly  is  a  regen- 
eration, because  man  is  changed  from  a  child  of  wrath  to 
a  child  of  God."  From  this  it  is  evident  that  regeneration 
has  been  variously  defined.  Some  have  considered  it  late 
dicta,  others  stricte  dicta,  and  still  others  strictissime  dicta. 
By  regeneration  late  dicta  is  understood  all  the  acts  of  grace 
or  regeneration  in  the  broad  sense;  stricte  dicta  denotes 
regeneration  in  the  sense  of  new  life  and  sonship;  while 
drictii^sime  dicta  is  equivalent  to  the  gift  of  faith  or  donatio 
fidei. 

*  Sol.  Declaratio  III,  686,  19,  20. 


REGEXERATIOX.  343 

1.    The  Definition  of  Regeneration. 

Regeneration  is  the  act  of  grace  through  tuhich  the  con- 
verted  sinner  at  the  time  of,  in,  ivith  and  through  justifi- 
cation receives  the  neiv  spiritual  life,  becomes  a  child  of  God 
and  is  i  eneived  in  heart. 

The  definition  here  given  corresponds  with  the  technical 
term  regeneratio  stricte  dicta.  The  so-called  late  dicta  is 
rarely  used.  The  selection  is,  therefore,  between  stricte  and 
strictissime  dicta.  According  to  both  of  these  definitions 
regeneration  is  instantaneous  like  justification.  Since  con- 
version, as  most  generally  defined,  consists  of  contrition 
and  faith,  there  is  a  difi'erence  in  the  conception  of  conver- 
sion and  regeneration,  the  former  being  progressive  and 
the  latter  instantaneous.  A  baptized  child  is  regenerated, 
and  an  adult  Christian  may  also  be  converted,  depending 
upon  whether  or  not  he  has  fallen  from  grace  and  been 
restored.  There  has  been  a  dispute  among  theologians  as 
to  whether  such  a  converted  and  restored  person  is  again 
regenerated.  This  question  depends  upon  whether  or  not 
regeneration  can  be  lost.  If  faith  can  be  lost,  it  is  self- 
evident  that  regeneration  can  be  lost.  This  takes  place 
when  a  fall  occurs  by  self-conscious,  premeditated  and  in- 
tentional sin.  A  real  apostasy  may  not  result,  if  repentance 
follows  soon.  Still  it  is  a  fall.  It  is  not  always  easy,  how- 
ever, to  distinguish  between  an  intentional  and  an  uninten- 
tional sin.  It  may  be  a  case  like  the  fall  of  Peter,  where 
faith  is  not  entirely  extinguished.  A  righteous  person  may 
in  a  certain  sense  fall  seven  times  and  yet  arise  again. 
When  a  real  fall  occurs,  man  is  in  the  same  condition  as 
the  prodigal  son.  Before  he  returned,  he  was  looked  upon 
as  dead,  but  when  he  returned  and  was  restored,  the  father 
said:  "This  my  son  was  dead  and  is  alive  again."  It  is 
clear  that  a  person  cannot  be  regenerated  and  at  the  same 
time  be  dead  in  sins.  We  must  be  careful  in  using  the  analogy 
of  human  birth  so  that  we  do  not  identify  a  birth  into  the 
natural  life  with  the  experience  of  being  born  again  in  the" 
kingdom  of  God.  A  spiritually  dead  person,  who  once  lived 
spiritually,  may  be  reborn  in  the  kingdom  of  grace. 


344  PNEUMATOLOGY. 

For  the  sake  of  clearness  it  is  also  of  some  importance  to 
investigate  or  decide  which  definition  of  regeneration  is  the 
most  Biblical.  There  is  very  little  hope,  if  any,  that  theolo- 
gians will  agree  on  this  question.  Many  will  follow  the  old 
dogmatic  view  according  to  the  definition  regeneratio  stric- 
tissime  dicta  or  regeneration  to  faith.  Just  as  many  prefer 
regeneratio  stricte  dicta  or  regeneration  by  or  through  faith. 
Regeneration  cannot  exist  before  faith,  and  a  person  cannot 
be  justified  without  faith.  We  are  justified  by  faith.  "Being 
therefore  justified  by  faith,  we  have  peace  with  God  through 
our  Lord  Jesus  Christ ;  through  whom  also  we  have  had  our 
access  by  faith  into  this  grace  wherein  we  stand"  (Rom. 
5:  1,  2)  ;  "The  righteous  shall  live  by  faith"  (Rom.  1:  17). 
Faith  is  receptive  and  apprehensive  and  manifests  itself  in 
confidence  or  trust.  When  the  Lutheran  Church  rejects 
fides  caritate  formata  and  emphasizes  the  purely  receptive 
character  of  faith,  it  seems  that  regeneration  by  faith  is  a 
clearer  expression  than  regeneration  to  faith,  although  the 
latter  term  also  presents  the  life  in  faith.  The  Bible  teaches 
plainly  that  we  are  justified  by  faith.  If  we  are  justified 
by  faith,  we  are  also  regenerated.  It  is  clearly  evident  that 
regeneration  cannot  be  the  cause  of  justification.  Justifica- 
tion as  the  objective  act  and  fact  is  the  causative  factor. 
When  the  Holy  Spirit  works  faith  in  the  repenting  sinner, 
that  very  moment  God  justifies  him,  and  the  subjective 
eflfect  is  regeneration.  All  three  acts  occur  at  the  same 
time.  But  in  order  to  have  a  logical  and  clear  conception 
we  must  place  justification  before  regeneration,  A  sinner 
could  not  be  regenerated  in  the  strict  sense,  if  he  were  not 
justified.  Justification  is  the  great  cause  in  the  heart  of 
God  in  heaven,  and  regeneration  is  the  great  effect  by  the 
Holy  Spirit  in  the  heart  of  man  on  earth. 

According  to  the  old  Dogmaticians  regeneration  is  the 
same  as  conversio  transitiva  and  especially  donatio  fidei. 
HOLLAZius  defines  as  follows:*  "Regeneratio  is  the  act  of 

*  HoLT.AZiis:  "Regeneratio  est  actus  gratiae,  quo  Spiritus  sanctus 
hominem  peccatorem  salvifica  fide  donat,  ut  remissis  peccatis  filius  Dei 
et  haeres  aeternae  vitae  reddatur." 


KEGEXERATIOX.  345 

grace  through  which  the  Holy  Spirit  endows  the  sinner  with 
saving  faith,  so  that  after  his  sins  have  been  forgiven,  he 
may  become  a  child  of  God  and  an  heir  to  eternal  life." 
In  such  case  man  is  regenerated  to  faith  and  not  through 
faith.  In  a  measure  regeneration  is  thought  of  as  succes- 
sive and  not  momentary  in  its  operation,  which  seems  to 
conflict  with  the  concept  of  birth.  GiSLE  Johnson  defines 
regeneration  as  follows :  "Regeneration  is  the  act  of  grace 
through  which  God  has  created  in  the  heart  of  the  penitent 
sinner  a  certain  and  living  assurance  of  the  objective  reality 
of  justification  and  in  this  assurance  im.planted  in  him  the 
fruitful  seed  of  a  new  life,  in  perfect  holiness  and  blessed- 
ness, embracing  the  whole  of  his  personal  natural  organism." 
The  relationship  between  justification  and  regeneration 
is  of  great  importance.  It  is  evident  that,  although  the 
Confessions  define  regeneration  somewhat  differently,  as 
for  instance  the  Apology  in  the  definition,  ''Justificatio  is 
regeneratio,"  they  do  not  teach  that  justification  is  received 
through  regeneration,  but  quite  the  contrary.  In  the  ex- 
planation of  the  Apology's  presentation  of  justification 
Gottfrid  Billing  says:*  "Inasmuch  as  faith  is  both  justi- 
fying and  regenerative  at  the  same  time,  therefore  the  word 
'justify'  may  signify  both  to  declare  righteous  and  to  regen- 
erate, but  faith  does  not  justify  because  it  is  regenerative, 
on  the  contrary,  it  is  regenerative  because  it  justifies.  Fur- 
thermore, it  justifies  because  it  is  apprehensive,  because  it 
receives  the  forgiveness  of  sins,  which  can  be  received  in  no 
other  way  save  through  faith  alone."  The  old  Dogmaticians, 
who  placed  regeneratio  before  justificatio,  did  not  thereby 
mean  to  express  that  justificatio  comes  about  through 
regeneratio.  On  this  account  Quenstedt  sought  to  estab- 
lish the  following:  "Regeneratio,  justificatio,  unio  mystica 
et  renovatio  tempore  simul  sunt."  He  considered  renovatio 
in  another  sense  than  that  which  is  common  now.  With 
regard  to  the  relationship  between  regeneratio  and  justi- 
ficatio it  is  true  that  they  take  place  simultaneously,  but  the 
question  is  as  to  whether  justificatio  as  the  dominating  act 

*  Billing,  Lutherska  Kyrkans  Bekännelse,  p.  426. 


346  r.NKi'.MATor.ooY. 

ought  not  to  be  placed  before  regeneratio.  Faith  is  indeed 
apprehensive,  and  when  man  is  justified  by  faith,  the  new 
life  is  created  or  is  born  in  him.  Roos  presents  the  relation 
between  justification  and  regeneration  in  the  following 
manner:*  "A  justified  Christian  is  also  a  regenerated 
Christian,  because  at  the  moment  he  believes  he  is  justified, 
but  at  the  same  moment  he  is  also  regenerated,  inasmuch 
as  faith  is  the  most  important  activity  of  the  spiritual  life, 
and  consequently  at  the  time  of  justification  he  receives  the 
new  life."  Schartau  places  justification  before  regenera- 
tion, but  says  that  the  gift  of  faith  can  be  considered  the 
first  part  of  regeneration.**  Nohrborg  in  his  doctrine  of 
the  order  of  salvation  presents  regeneration  as  the  great 
change  that  takes  place  in  man  when  he  is  translated  from 
spiritual  death  to  spiritual  life  in  Christ  through  faith,  but 
he  also  says  that  regeneration  is  the  gift  of  faith. t  Cita- 
tions could  be  made  from  many  of  the  newer  writers  who 
define  regeneration  as  donatio  fidei.  References  could  also 
be  made  to  many  places  in  modern  theological  literature 
which  present  regeneration  as  the  new  life  and  place  jus- 
tification before  regeneration.  Representatives  of  the  latter 
view  are  Thomasius,  Luthardt,  Gisle  Johnson,  Landgren 
and  others. 

We  would  simply  add  the  following  to  what  has  already 
been  stated.  It  would  seem  as  if  regeneration  were  not 
adequately  described  by  the  definition  donatio  fidei.  The 
first  stage  of  regeneration  may  indeed  be  called  the  kindling 
of  faith  as  a  preparatory  act,  since  indications  of  life  pre- 
cede the  real  birth.  Even  excitation  in  an  earlier  stage  of 
development  is  an  indication  of  life.  A  birth,  to  use  the 
natural  birth  as  an  analogy,  is  not  the  beginning  of  life,  it 
is  the  real  appearance  of  life.  The  child  possesses  life 
before  it  is  born,  but  its  real  life  begins  with  its  advent 
into  this  world.  So  in  the  awakened  sinner  there  are  indi- 
cations of  spiritual  life  through  the  activity  of  grace,  but 

*  Roos,  Troslära.  p.  178.  » 

**  Schartau.  Bref.  No.  XXVIII. 
t  Nohrborg,  Postilla,  pp.  460,  461. 


REGENERATION.  347 

he  is  regenerated  when  he  is  born  into  the  spiritual  world 
and  made  a  child  of  God.  But  we  cannot  conceive  of  a 
person  regenerated  and  possessing  spiritual  life  with  sins 
•unforgiven.  Justification  must  precede  the  spiritual  life. 
No  one  can  be  a  child  of  God  that  is  not  justified.  But  faith 
is  a  condition  of  justification  and  must  therefore  precede 
it,  since  faith  is  receptive  like  the  mouth  or  the  hand. 
Faith  itself  is  not  the  spiritual  life,  but  receives  the  spir- 
itual life  through  justification.  The  gift  of  faith  would 
therefore  not  seem  to  define  regeneration  adequately.  We 
may  indeed  speak  of  a  living  faith  as  contrasted  with  a 
dead  faith,  as  well  as  the  life  of  faith  on  the  basis  of  that 
life  which  faith  apprehends  and  contains,  but  faith  is  never- 
theless not  the  same  as  life,  and  the  gift  of  faith  is  an 
incomplete  definition  of  regeneration.  Then,  too,  regenera- 
tion implies  a  new  relationship  in  the  sense  that  the  regen- 
erated person  is  a  child  of  God,  since  he  is  born  of  God. 
Inasmuch  as  this  new  relationship  must  belong  to  regenera- 
tion, it  is  evident  that  man  is  regenerated  through  faith 
and  not  only  to  faith.  Compare  John  1 :  12,  13 :  "But  as 
many  as  received  him,  to  them  gave  he  the  right  to  become 
the  children  of  God,  even  to  them  that  believe  on  his  name." 
Faith  is  mentioned  as  preceding  regeneration.  That  which 
follows  immediately  upon  faith  is  justification,  if,  for  the 
sake  of  logical  sequence,  we  would  distinguish  as  to  time 
between  justification  and  regeneration.  ''Being  therefore 
justified  by  faith,  we  have  peace  with  God  through  our  Lord 
Jesus  Christ"  (Rom.  5:1).  In  1  John  5:  1  faith  is  pre- 
sented as  a  criterion  of  regeneration.  Compare  Gal.  3 :  26 : 
'Tor  ye  are  all  sons  of  God,  through  faith,  in  Christ  Jesus." 
Some  have  used  Titus  3:  5 — 7  as  an  argument  in  favor  of 
the  position  that  regeneration  precedes  justification,  but 
these  might  with  as  much  reason  assert  that  renovation 
also  precedes.  In  this  passage  Paul  does  not  discuss  the 
order  of  sequence  in  the  acts  of  grace,  but  presents  salva- 
tion by  grace  and  the  means  by  which  it  may  be  attained. 
We  therefore  maintain  that  regeneration  is  more  complete- 
ly, logically  and  Scripturally  comprehended  if  we  adhere 


348  PNEUMATOLOGY. 

to  the  definition  that  is  called  regeneratio  stricte  dicta,  since 
late  dicta  embraces  too  much,  and  strictissime  dicta  (donatio 
fidei)  expresses  too  little. 

2.    The  Causes  of  Regeneration. 

Man,  who  stands  in  need  of  spiritual  life,  is  subjcctum 
quod,  while  his  spiritual  nature  (anima  humana)  is  siib- 
jectum  quo,  but  he  is  not  the  active  subject,  since  he  cannot 
regenerate  himself.  Causa  efficiens  principalis  is  God  and 
in  a  special  sense  the  Holy  Spirit,  since  the  Spirit  applies 
salvation.  Therefore  the  Scriptures  use  the  expressions, 
"born  of  God,"  "the  children  of  God,"  etc.  Causa  impulsiva 
interna  is  the  mercy  of  God.  Compare  Titus  3:  5.  Causa 
impulsiva,  externa  is  Christ  the  mediator,  or  His  merit. 
Causa  efficiens  minus  principalis,  which  is  the  same  as  the 
means  of  regeneration,  are  the  Word  of  God  and  Baptism. 

Regeneration  can  not  be  wrought  by  man,  but  God  is 
active  in  this  wonderful  work  of  grace.  Cf.  John  1 :  13 : 
"Who  were  born,  not  of  blood,  nor  of  the  will  of  the  flesh, 
nor  of  the  will  of  man,  but  of  God."  But  this  divine 
activity  does  not  repress  the  freedom  of  man,  which  subject 
has  been  treated  before  in  the  doctrine  of  conversion.  In 
accordance  with  the  divine  revelation  regeneration  is 
wrought  solely  through  Baptism  and  the  Word.  For  this 
reason  Jesus  said  to  Nicodemus:  "Except  one  be  born  of 
water  and  the  Spirit,  he  cannot  enter  into  the  kingdom  of 
God"  (John  3:  5).  James  writes:  "Of  his  own  will  he 
brought  us  forth  by  the  word  of  truth,  that  we  should  be 
a  kind  of  firstfruits  of  his  creatures"  (James  1 :  18) .  Com- 
pare 1  Peter  1 :  23 :  "Having  been  begotten  again,  not  of 
corruptible  seed,  but  of  incorruptible,  through  the  word  of 
God,  which  liveth  and  abideth."  Baptism  and  the  Word 
work  together  in  an  indissoluble  union,  hence  they  must 
both  be  used  in  accordance  with  the  order  of  God.  Where 
they  are  rightly  used,  and  the  necessary  conditions  axe  at 
hand,  they  work  regeneration. 


THE   :\[YSTICAL   T^XIOX.  349 

3.    The  Starting  Point  and  End  of  Regeneration. 

Termiyuis  a  quo  is  the  want  of  spiritual  life.  The  under- 
standing is  by  nature  incapable  of  correctly  knowing  the 
spiritual  life.  Compare  John  1 :  5 ;  1  Cor.  2 :  14 ;  Eph.  5  :  8. 
The  natural  will  of  man  is  not  fitted  to  will  that  which  is 
good  nor  to  seek  the  good  of  the  spiritual  life.  Compare 
Rom.  8 :  7.  The  emotions  are  not  inclined  toward  that 
which  is  spiritual,  but  seek  after  the  lusts  of  the  flesh. 
Compare  Rom.  7 :  5. 

Terminus  ad  quern  is  the  spiritual  life  and  the  spiritual 
powers.  Compare  2  Cor.  5 :  17 :  "Wherefore  if  any  man  is 
in  Christ,  he  is  a  new  creature ;  the  old  things  are  passed 
away ;  behold,  they  are  become  new."  Cf .  Col.  3  :  10 ;  1  John 
5 :  12,  etc.  This  change  of  spiritual  life,  however,  is  not 
substantial,  but  accidental,  since  the  personality  of  man  is 
not  destroyed,  but  made  different,  so  as  to  result  in  a  new 
m.an,  although  the  old  man  is  not  dead  nor  destroyed.  For 
this  reason  we  reject  the  teaching  of  the  Fanatics,  who  say 
that  regeneration  destroys  the  human  body,  while  the  soul 
remains  and  a  new  body  is  formed.  The  doctrine  of  the 
Flacians  is  likewise  rejected,  which  states  that  a  new  heart 
is  created  in  such  fashion  that  the  essence  of  the  old  Adam 
and  especially  the  intelligent  soul  is  destroyed  and  a  new 
soul  essence  is  created  out  of  nothing.  If  the  change  were 
essential  or  substantial,  no  fall  from  grace  could  take  place 
and  the  spiritual  life  would  become  mechanical. 

Finis  Tproxivfiiis  is  unio  mystica  and  renovatio,  and  finis 
ultimus  is  the  salvation  of  the  regenerate  person  and  the 
glory  of  God. 

§29.     THE  MYSTICAL  UNION. 

The  new  life,  brought  about  by  regeneration,  is  evidenced 
in  the  fact  that  God  dwells  in  the  regenerated  man,  while 
the  regenerated  man  dwells  in  God.  The  regenerated  man 
is  born  to  the  life  of  the  spiritual  world.  He  has  returned 
to  the  original  state  of  man  when  God  in  a  special  sense 
dwelt  in  man.    With  justification  and  regeneration  the  sub- 


350  p^•Eu^rATOI.OGY. 

jective  restoration  of  man  has  begun  to  be  realized,  so  that 
the  image  of  God  comes  to  be  restored  more  and  more.  The 
Triune  God  is  not  far  from  His  children,  indeed  He  dwells 
in  them.  This  indwelling  in  the  hearts  of  the  believers 
possesses  greater  significance  than  the  general  presence  of 
God.  The  mystical  union  is  a  union  with  God  that  is  more 
intimate  and  more  peculiarly  operative  than  the  presence 
of  God  spoken  of  by  Paul  in  Acts  17 :  27,  28,  where  he  says : 
"Though  he  is  not  far  from  each  one  of  us :  for  in  him  we 
live,  and  move,  and  have  our  being."  Although  it  is  not 
easy,  indeed  hardly  possible,  in  anything  like  an  adequate 
manner  to  describe  the  mystical  union,  still  the  doctrine  is 
well  founded  in  the  Word  of  God  and  forms  one  of  the  most 
precious  treasures  of  the  Lutheran  Church  and  a  source 
of  rich  comfort  to  the  believer. 

1.    The  Definition  of  the  Mystical  Union. 

HOLLAZius  defines  the  mystical  union  as  follows:*  'The 
mystical  union  is  the  spiritual  conjunction  of  the  Triune 
God  ivith  justified  man,  by  ivhich  He  divells  in  him  a^  in  a 
consecrated  temple  by  His  special  presence,  and  this  sub- 
stantial, and  operates  iyi  the  same  by  His  gracious  influ- 
ence." Unio  mystica  may  be  considered  both  as  unitio  and 
nnio.  Unitio  is  the  act  of  union  which  is  momentary  and 
takes  place  at  the  same  time  as  justification  and  regenera- 
tion. Unio  is  the  continuous  state.  Dogmaticians  also 
speak  of  the  means  of  the  mystical  union.  On  the  divine 
side  these  are  the  Gospel,  Baptism  and  the  Lord's  Supper. 
On  the  human  side  the  means  is  faith.  The  union  is  called 
mystical  because  it  is  a  great  mystery,  while  its  modus  is 
not  completely  comprehensible, 

QUENSTEDT  presents  both  the  mystical  union  with  the 
Triune  God  and  the  special  union  with  the  God-man.  He 
says   that  the   latter   implies   that   Christ   constitutes   the 

♦HoLLAZiiTs:  "Qnio  mystica  est  conjunctio  spiritualis  Dei  triunius 
cum  homine  justificato,  qua  in  hoc  velut  consecrato  templo  praesentia 
speciali  eaque  substantiali  habitat  et  gratioso  influxu  in  eodem  opera- 
tur." 


THE   MYSTICAL   fXION^.  351 

spiritual  union  with  the  regenerated  man,  works  in  and 
through  him,  so  that  what  the  believer  experiences,  suffers, 
and  does  as  a  Christian,  is  all  dedicated  to  Christ.  Compare 
Gal.  2 :  20 :  "Christ  liveth  in  me."  He  says  that  through 
this  union  a  Christian  becomes  anointed  and  furnished  as 
a  spiritual  prophet,  priest  and  king.  This  union  is  likewise 
a  marriage  covenant  with  Christ,  so  that  the  Christians 
become  the  bride  of  Christ.     Compare  Eph.  5 :  31,  32. 

Among  other  Scripture  passages  we  would  call  atten- 
tion to  the  following:  "If  a  man  love  me,  he  will  keep  my 
word :  and  my  Father  will  love  him,  and  we  will  come  unto 
him,  and  make  our  abode  with  him"  (John  14 :  23)  ;  "I  come 
unto  you"  (John  14:  18;  cf.  15:  4,  5 ;  17:  21—23;  Rom.  8: 
9 — 11)  ;  "Know  ye  not  that  ye  are  a  temple  of  God,  and  that 
the  Spirit  of  God  dwelleth  in  you?"  (1  Cor.  3:  16;  6:  19; 
cf.  also  6:  15,  17;  Gal.  3:  27)  ;  "A  habitation  of  God  in  the 
Spirit"  (Eph.  2:  22)  ;  "Partakers  of  the  divine  nature"  (2 
Peter  1:4).  The  mystical  union  is  presented  in  1  John 
4:  16  as  a  mutual  covenant  of  love:  "We  know  and  have 
believed  the  love  which  God  hath  in  us.  God  is  love ;  and 
he  that  abideth  in  love  abideth  in  God,  and  God  abideth  in 
him."  The  mystical  union,  therefore,  not  only  finds  ex- 
pression in  reciprocal  love  to  God,  but  also  love  to  all  who 
are  united  with  Christ.  Cf.  Eph.  5:  29,  30:  "For  no  man 
ever  hated  his  own  flesh ;  but  nourisheth  and  cherisheth  it, 
even  as  Christ  also  the  church ;  because  we  are  members  of 
his  body."  Compare  Eph.  4:  2—6;  1  Cor.  12:  26.  "Now 
ye  are  the  body  of  Christ,  and  severally  members  thereof" 
(1  Cor.  12:  27). 

2.    Negative  and  Positive  Characteristics. 

Inasmuch  as  the  mystical  union  cannot  be  comprehended 
and  described  in  an  adequate  way,  therefore  negative  and 
positive  terms  are  employed  in  order  to  obviate  misunder- 
standings and  as  nearly  as  possible  present  the  content  of 
this  doctrine.  The  negative  characteristics  are  the  fol- 
lowing: 1)  Non  transsubstantialis.  The  believer  is  indeed  a 
child  of  God,  but  is  not  made  divine.    The  believers  partake 


352  r.NKlMATOI.OGY. 

of  the  nature  of  God,  but  are  not  changed  to  a  divine  nature. 
2)  Non  coyisubfitantialis,  so  that  two  substances  become  one 
substance.  3)  Noyi  substantialis  formaliter,  i.  e.,  like  a 
grafted  branch  forms  a  unit  with  the  tree.  God  dwells  in 
the  Christian,  but  the  abode  is  not  changed  to  the  Indweller, 
nor  vice  versa.  God  can  take  His  departure  from  man  and 
therefore  His  indwelling  is  not  an  incarnation.  Through 
the  mystical  union  we  put  on  Christ,  but  that  which  is  put 
on  is  not  identical  with  the  person  upon  whom  it  is  put. 
The  followers  of  Weigel  and  Schwenkfeld  taught  that  the 
union  was  essential.  When  Hollazius  employs  the  term 
substantial  he  simply  means  that  the  divine  substance  is 
united  with  the  human  substance  in  a  real  although  a  mys- 
tical manner.  4)  Non  mere  moralis,  as  for  instance  the 
union  between  the  souls  of  David  and  Jonathan,  since  the 
union  implies  a  great  deal  more.  5)  Non  mere  operatio 
gratiosa,  since  it  it  not  only  a  divine  activity.  It  is  God 
Himself  that  dwells  in  man,  not  only  His  gifts.  The  posi- 
tive terms  are  the  following:  1)  Vera  et  realis,  since  it  is 
a  true  and  real  union  and  not  one  that  is  metaphoric  and 
ideal.  2)  Intima,  so  that  God  approaches  the  believer  and 
enters  into  a  special  relationship  with  him.  In  a  repletive 
sense  God  is  omnipresent  and  can  therefore  enter  into  a 
special  mystical  union  with  the  believers.  He  fills  them 
with  all  the  fulness  of  God,  operates  in  and  through  them 
with  all  wisdom  and  power.  This  is  a  concursus  in  a  higher 
degree.  3)  Gratiosa  in  the  Church  militant  or  the  kingdom 
of  grace.    4)  Gloriosa  in  the  Church  triumphant. 

3.    Testimonium  Spiritus  Sancti  Internum. 

Since  God  in  accordance  with  unio  mystica  dwells  in  man, 
and  man  becomes  the  temple  of  the  Holy  Spirit,  therefore 
the  Christian  must  in  some  way  experience  the  mystical 
union  and  receive  some  testimony  that  he  is  a  child  of  God. 
The  life-relationship  with  the  Lord  is  capable  of  revealing 
itself  in  a  palpable  way.  There  are  many  who  at  the  be- 
ginning of  the  life  of  faith  experience  unusual  joy  and 
happiness,   while   the   majority  experience   at   least   some 


THE  :my,stical  xtxiox.  353 

moment  of  exalted  glory  when  the  assurance  of  faith  is 
powerful  and  strong.  But  this  experience  is  not  the  same 
in  all  men.  It  may  happen  in  the  case  of  some  that  quite 
some  time  will  elapse  before  they  come  to  know  of  the 
assurance  of  faith  with  its  transport  of  heavenly  joy.  The 
emotions  vary  and  the  child  of  God  soon  learns  that  the 
Christian  life  ofttimes  implies  a  struggle  without  the  pres- 
ence of  any  joyous  em.otions  to  comfort  and  cheer.  On  this 
account  it  is  necessary  that  some  guidance  be  afforded  so 
that  the  Christian  may  know  and  be  assured  that  he  is  a 
child  of  God.  The  method  by  which  this  is  accomplished 
according  to  the  Word  of  God  is  the  testimony  of  the  Holy 
Spirit  or  testimonium  Spiritus  sancti  internum, 

Paul  writes  in  1  Cor.  2 :  10 — 12 :  "But  unto  us  God  re- 
vealed them  through  the  Spirit:  for  the  Spirit  searcheth 
all  things,  yea,  the  deep  things  of  God.  For  who  among 
men  knoweth  the  things  of  man,  save  the  spirit  of  man, 
which  is  in  him?  even  so  the  things  of  God  none  knoweth. 
save  the  Spirit  of  God.  But  we  received,  not  he  spirit  of 
the  world,  but  the  spirit  which  is  from  God ;  that  we  might 
know  the  things  that  were  freely  given  to  us  of  God."  And 
in  Rom.  8 :  16  it  is  expressly  stated :  "The  Spirit  himself 
beareth  witness  with  our  spirit,  that  we  are  the  children  of 
God." 

Before  the  operation  of  the  Spirit,  as  stated  in  Ordo 
Salutis,  and  especially  before  the  new  birth  man  knows 
God  the  Father  only  as  a  providential  Father  and  usually 
only  as  the  almighty  and  just  judge  of  earth  and  heaven; 
Christ  is  known  historically  and  the  knowledge  of  the  Holy 
Ghost  is  vague  and  His  personality  is  not  clear.  By  the  co- 
witnessing  of  the  Spirit  the  personality  of  the  Holy  Spirit 
becomes  more  and  more  distinct.  The  Holy  Spirit  reveals 
Christ  through  the  Word  in  a  real  way  and  Jesus  Christ 
becomes  like  a  friend,  yea,  as  a  brother,  and  through  Christ 
the  Father  becomes  a  real  Father.  A  Christian  under- 
stands then  the  meaning  of  the  resurrection  greeting  of 
Jesus  Christ :  "Go  unto  my  brethren  and  say  to  them,  I 
ascend  unto  my  Father  and  your  Father,  and  my  God  and 


354  PNEUJIATOLOGY. 

your  God."  In  the  new  birth  or  regeneration  a  believer 
enters  the  spiritual  world  of  the  kingdom  of  God  in  its  first 
form  of  experience.  The  great  Christian  facts  become 
clearer  and  clearer.  The  co-witnessing  of  the  Spirit  with 
our  spirit  becomes  a  strong  testimony.  The  Bible  as  a  text- 
book becomes  a  living  guide  and  the  Christian  experience 
is  clarified.* 

The  testimony  of  the  Spirit  has  been  described  in  various 
ways.  The  most  prominent  theologians  hold  different 
views  concerning  the  proofs  of  Christian  experience  and 
testimony.  Among  these  theologians  may  be  mentioned 
especially  Frank,  Philippi  and  Dorner.  Frank**  bases 
the  testimony  of  Christian  experience  on  the  great  trans- 
formation through  which  the  Christian  passes  in  conver- 
sion and  regeneration  together  with  what  he  experiences  in 
the  daily  conversion  or  sanctification.  DORNERf  opposes  the 
viewpoint  of  Frank,  which  he  characterizes  as  subjective, 
i.  e.,  according  to  Dorner,  Frank  has  presented  a  subjective 
and  not  an  objective  principle  of  knowledge.  Dorner  de- 
clares that  we  may  possess  an  immediate  knowledge  of  God, 
not  merely  a  secondary  knowledge  obtained  through  ratioci- 
nation which  leads  us  back  to  the  cause.  He  says  that 
we  do  not  become  assured  of  God  on  the  ground  of  our  con- 
sciousness of  regeneration  and  conversion,  but  because  we 
know  that  God  in  Christ  is  for  us,  therefore  we  know  that 
we  are  saved.  Furthermore,  faith  possesses  a  spiritual  in- 
tuition concerning  God  as  our  Father;  it  possesses  knowl- 
edge not  only  concerning  itself  as  redeemed,  but  also,  and 
in  a  primary  sense,  concerning  the  God  of  our  salvation. 
Dorner's  doctrine  in  regard  to  an  immediate  intuition  does 
not  correspond  to  true  mysticism,  it  tends  toward  the  false. 
Philippi:!:  sets  forth  the  objective  reconciliation  performed 
by  Christ,  as  attested  an  offered  in  the  Word  of  God,  both 
as  the  starting  point  and  the  only  foundation  on  which  a 

*  Compare  Lindberg's  Apologetics,  §19,  3,  p.  151. 
**  System  der  Chr.  Gewissheit,  §§  15,  16. 
t  System  of  Chr.  Doctrine,  Vol.  I.  pp.  31—184. 
t  Glaubenslehre,  V.  2.     Zweite  aufl.,  p.  58. 


RENOVATIOX.  355 

Christian  can  base  his  assurance  of  salvation.  Nohrborg* 
states  that  the  testimonies  of  the  Holy  Spirit  are  twofold : 
internally  in  the  heart  and  externally  in  the  Word.  In 
accordance  with  the  first  class  of  testimonies  the  Spirit 
bears  witness  through  all  His  gracious  acts  taken  together 
and  He  bears  witness  with  our  spirit,  not  alone.  The  effects 
which  belong  to  the  testimonies  of  the  Holy  Spirit  begin 
with  the  gift  of  faith  and  continue  on  down  through  daily 
sanctification.  In  accordance,  therefore,  with  the  continued 
acts  of  the  Spirit,  we  know  that  we  are  the  children  of  God. 
Compare  1  John  3 :  24 :  "And  hereby  we  know  that  he 
abideth  in  us,  by  the  Spirit  which  he  gave  us."  The  Spirit 
bears  witness  Mith  our  spirit  through  the  Word  when  we 
read  and  hear  it,  thereby  learning  to  know  the  character 
of  those  that  are  the  Lord's.  It  is,  therefore,  not  a  new 
revelation,  but  the  Spirit,  dwelling  in  the  believers  and 
bearing  testimony  through  the  Word,  that  is  the  ground 
of  faith  and  grants  the  internal  assurance  through  His 
works  of  grace.  This  testimony  of  the  Spirit  will  at  times 
become  especially  clear,  giving  rise  to  great  joy  in  the  Lord. 
The  Christian  is  also  admonished  in  the  Scriptures  to  seek 
the  assurance  of  faith  and  joy  in  the  Lord.  But  even  if 
these  experiences  of  joy  be  infrequent,  still  he  relies  and 
rests  in  faith  on  the  promise  of  God  in  the  Word. 

§30.     RENOVATION. 

The  life  of  the  regenerated  Christian  must  grow  and 
develop.  It  is  not  sufficient  that  a  man  has  been  born  into 
the  spiritual  world,  thereby  coming  into  possession  of  spir- 
itual life,  but  as  a  child  of  God  he  must  grow  and  develop 
under  the  fostering  care  of  the  Spirit.  Man  begins  his 
walk  in  the  newness  of  life,  clothed  in  the  righteousness 
of  Christ,  with  the  power  of  sin  broken  in  principle,  but 
with  the  old  Adam  still  alive.  Through  the  act  of  regenera- 
tion the  Christian  has  received  new  powers  by  which  he 
willingly  co-operates  in  the  continued  work  of  redemption 

*  Nohrborg,  Postilla,  18th  ed.,  p.  474. 


:!i)fi  PNEUMATOI.OOY. 

through  the  grace  of  the  Spirit.  The  development  of  Chris- 
tian liberty  is  always  conditioned  by  grace.  This  grace 
is  called  gratia  cooperans,  and  although  the  Christian  co- 
operates in  the  work  of  renovation,  still  he  does  not  do  so 
through  his  own  natural  powers,  but  through  the  powers 
granted  by  the  Spirit,  and  in  a  direct  sense  grace  always 
remains  the  principle  of  renovation  and  sanctification. 

Renovation  and  sanctification  have  been  considered  in 
both  a  broad  and  a  more  restricted  sense.  Sanctification 
can  be  considered  as  a  part  of  renovation.  By  sanctification 
some  understand  all  the  works  of  grace,  and  then  it  is  called 
mnctificatio  late  dicta.  Sanctificatio  stvicte  dicta  is  equiv- 
alent to  renovatio  negativa,  and  strictissime  dicta  is  equiva- 
lent to  the  positive  side  of  renovatio. 

While  regeneratio  is  a  momentary  act,  renovatio,  on  the 
other  hand,  is  a  progressive  process,  which  continues 
through  life.  The  Christian  experiences  anew  the  gracious 
acts  of  the  Spirit,  in  general,  not  with  the  same  limitations 
as  during  the  period  of  conversion,  but  in  a  more  intimate 
way  with  the  acts  of  grace  interlocking  and  overlapping. 

1.    The  Definition  of  Renovation. 

Renovation  is  that  act  of  grace  by  ivhich  the  Holy  Spirit 
through  the  ineaiis  of  grace  ivith  the  co-operation  of  the 
regenerated  person  more  and  more  overcomes  the  poiver  of 
sin  ami  restores  the  image  of  God,  so  that  the  old  man  is 
put  off  ayid  the  new  män  is  put  on.  Renovation  consists  of 
two  acts,  one  the  negative,  and  the  other  the  positive. 

Renovatio  negativa  or  sayictificatio  stride  dicta  is  that 
part  of  the  grace  of  renovation  by  which  the  power  of  sin 
is  ever  increasingly  overcome  and  the  old  Adam  is  put  off 
or  dies,  although  slowly. 

Renovatio  jjositiva  or  sanctificatio  strictissime  dicta  is 
therefore  the  gracious  act  of  the  Spirit  through  which  He 
renews  in  man  the  image  of  God,  while  man  co-operates 
with  the  powers  granted  in  regeneration.  Renovation  is 
therefore  considered  both  from  the  transitive  and  intransi- 
tive point  of  view. 


RENOVATION.  357 

Causa  efficiens  priucipalis  is  the  Triune  God,  but  termi- 
native  the  Holy  Spirit.  Compare  1  Thess.  5 :  23  ;  Rom.  15 : 
16;  Gal.  5:  22;  Titus  3:  5.  The  regenerated  person  is  con- 
sidered causa  efRciens  in  a  secondary  sense.  Compare  Phil. 
2 :  12,  13.  Terminus  a  quo  is  the  old  Adam  and  unconquered 
sins.  SubjecUim  quo  is  in  a  primary  sense  the  spiritual 
nature  of  man,  which  sin  has  permeated  and  corrupted  as 
to  the  intellect,  will  and  emotions.  In  a  secondary  sense 
the  membra  corporis  are  also  included.  The  media  or  means 
that  are  to  be  used  are  the  means  of  grace,  although  the 
means  employed  in  ascetic  morality  may  at  times  prove 
useful  as  formal  auxiliaries. 

Among  Scripture  passages  that  present  the  negative  and 
positive  sides  of  renovation  the  following  may  be  quoted: 
"Though  our  outward  man  is  decaying,  yet  our. inward  man 
is  renewed  day  by  day"  (2  Cor.  4:  16)  ;  "Our  old  man  was 
crucified  with  him,  that  the  body  of  sin  might  be  done  away, 
that  we  should  no  longer  be  in  bondage  to  sin"  (Rom,  6:6); 
"Put  ye  on  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ"  (Rom.  13:  14;  cf.  4:  22 
—24;  Col.  3:  9,  10). 

2.    The  Degrees  of  Renovation  or  Sanctification. 

Inasmuch  as  renovation  is  progressive  and  therefore  con- 
tinually developing,  it  must  have  degrees.  The  above-cited 
passage  from  2  Cor.  4 :  16  as  well  as  other  passages  indicate 
this.  Sometimes  a  backsliding  will  take  place  on  account 
of  the  weakness  of  man,  but  the  normal  state  is  one  of 
progress.  In  this  matter  the  emotions  are  not  always  a 
reliable  gauge,  and  man  himself  is  seldom  able  to  measure 
the  progress  of  his  spiritual  development.  Under  normal 
conditions  the  Christian  passes  through  the  various  spir- 
itual ages  such  as  the  age  of  spiritual  childhood,  youth,  and 
manhood.  Compare  1  Cor.  3 :  1 ;  1  John  2 :  12 — 14 ;  Heb. 
6:  1;  1  Cor.  16:  13.  But  although  terminus  ad  quem  is  the 
new  man,  yet  renovation  never  becomes  complete  in  this 
life,  which  doctrine  we  stress  against  Methodists  and  others, 
who  assert  that  man  can  become  perfectly  sinless  on  earth. 


358  i'Ni:rMATOi,0(;Y. 

Compare  Rom.  7:  19—22;  Gal.  5:  17;  Phil.  3:  12—16;  Heb. 
12:  1;  1  John  1:  8—10;  3:  2. 

3.    The  Proof  of  Renovation  in  Good  Works. 

Renovatio  is  demonstrated  in  good  ivorks.  They  are  called 
good  works,  not  because  they  are  perfect  in  themselves,  but 
because  they  proceed  from  faith.  Only  the  regenerated  are 
therefore  capable  of  doing  good  works.  By  good  works  are 
meant  not  only  external  deeds,  but  also  the  emotions  of  the 
heart  and  the  decisions  of  the  will.  Hollazius  defines  bona 
opera  as  follows:*  "Bona  opera  are  the  free  acts  of  justi- 
fied persons  which  stand  forth  as  good  in  the  light  of  the 
preceding  true  faith  in  Christ  and  are  performed  through 
the  renewing  grace  of  the  Holy  Spirit,  according  to  the 
prescription  of  the  divine  Law,  to  the  honor  of  God  and  the 
edification  of  man." 

The  Lutheran  Church  has  never  underestimated  the  sig- 
nificance of  good  works,  and  her  doctrine  of  justification 
does  not  conflict  with  the  Biblical  doctrine  of  good  works. 
But  by  reason  of  the  teachings  of  the  Catholic  Church  con- 
cerning good  works  and  her  false  doctrine  of  justification 
it  became  necessary  for  the  Protestant  Church  to  emphasize 
the  doctrine  of  justification  by  faith  alone,  without  thereby 
denying  the  necessity  of  good  works  as  the  fruits  of  faith. 
The  Catholics  have  intermingled  good  works  in  justification 
and  have  falsely  conceived  both  justification  and  sanctifica- 
tion.  The  Church  of  the  Middle  Ages  taught  that  the  works 
that  proceed  from  gratia  habitualis  merit  everlasting  life. 
The  consilia  evangelica  were  placed  above  the  fulfilment 
of  prsecepta,  such  as  abstention  from  the  pleasures  of  the 
world,  voluntary  poverty,  chastity  and  obedience.  The 
Council  of  Trent**  decided  that  the  justified  man  is  able  to 
fulfill  the  commandments  of  God,  and  the  meeting  con- 
demned those  that  deny  this.     In  the  confutation  of  the 

*  HoLi-Azius:  "Bona  opera  sunt  actus  hominum  justificatorum  liberi 
per  gratiam  Spiritus  sancti  renovantera  ad  prsescriptum  legis  divinse 
praelucente  vera  in  Christum  fide  prfEstiti  in  honorein  Dei  ad  hominum 
.-pdificationem." 

♦♦  Sessio  VI,  Caput  XI  et  Canon  XIII. 


RENOVATIOX.  359 

Augsburg  Confession  the  Catholic  Church  states  that  the 
doctrine  of  sola  fide  conflicts  absolutely  with  the  Word  of 
God,  while  the  doctrine  of  good  works  is  emphasized.    The 
Apology  presents  clearly  the  relation   between   faith   and 
good  works.     Major,  Menius  and  Amsdorf  especially  gave 
rise  to  an  investigation  of  the  relationship  between  justifi- 
cation and  good  works.    These  theologians  expressed  them- 
selves in  a  way  that  could  be  misunderstood.     Major  and 
Menius  expressed  themselves  as  follows :   Good  deeds  are 
necessary  to  salvation.     No  one  can  be  saved  without  good 
works.    Good  works  are  necessary  in  order  to  retain  salva- 
tion or  are  necessary  in  order  not  to  lose  salvation.    Ams- 
dorf, on  the  contrary,  stated  that  good  works  are  injurious 
for  salvation.     The   Formula  of  Concord*    sets  forth  the 
following  points  among  others :  That  it  is  the  will  of  God 
that  the  believers  perform  good  works ;  that  good  works 
are  not  performed  through  the  natural  powers  of  man; 
that  good  works  are  well-pleasing  to  God  for  Christ's  sake 
through  faith ;  that  good  works  are  to  be  performed  not 
by  constraint  (coactio),  but  by  the  free  spirit,  which  free- 
dom is  not  arbitrary.     Such  modes  of  expression  as  those 
used  by  Major  and  Menius  ought  to  be  avoided,  since  they 
may  be  misunderstood,  while  they  conflict  with  particulse 
exclusivae.    The  Epicurean  doctrine  that  faith,  justification 
and  salvation  could  not  be  lost  through  intentional  sins  was 
also  rejected.    But  if  salvation  could  be  lost  through  inten- 
tional sins,  still  it  could  not  be  kept  through  good  works. 
Faith  is  indeed  the  only  organ  for  the  reception  of  justifica- 
tion and  salvation  both  in  regard  to  the  beginning,  middle 
and  end.    The  expressions  of  Amsdorf  were  also  criticized. 
Good  works  are  injurious  only  when  intermingled  in  justi- 
fication so  as  to  constitute  the  foundation  for  self-confidence. 
But  when  performed  with  the  proper  intention  and  for  a 
proper  end  they  are  the  characteristic  marks  of  the  Chris- 
tian and  are  well-pleasing  to  God,  who  shall  reward  them 
both  in  this  life  and  in  that  which  is  to  come. 

Affectiones  operum  bononim  are  therefore:    1)    sponte 

*  Muller,  Symb.  Biicher,  Sol.  Decl.  IV,  p.  624. 


360  I'.NEUJtATOLOGY. 

fivnt,  or  that  they  take  place  voluntarily;  2)  necessaria,  or 
that  they  are  necessary  as  the  fruits  of  faith;  3)  imper- 
fecta, inasmuch  as  they  are  imperfect. 

Bona  opera  are  divided  into  interna  and  externa.  With 
regard  to  their  so-called  forma  the  old  Dogmaticians  say 
that  when  they  are  considered  in  the  absolute  sense,  then 
forma  is  conformitas  cum  lec/e,  but  when  considered  in  the 
relative  sense,  on  the  ground  of  the  special  favor  of  God, 
then  forma  is  fides  in  Christum,  since  the  works  do  not  com- 
pletely conform  to  the  demands  of  the  Law,  but  nevertheless 
are  well-pleasing  to  God  on  account  of  faith  which  appre- 
hends Christ. 

There  are  different  degrees  of  good  works  and  all  are 
not  of  the  same  quality.  Bona  opera  have  therefore  been 
divided  into  different  grades,  as  follows:  1)  inteiior  obe- 
dientia  cordis,  such  as  good  intentions,  the  inclination  of 
the  will  and  the  pure  motives  of  the  heart.  To  this  clags 
belong  the  invisible  works  of  sanctification  which  God  alone 
sees;  2)  opera  moralia  tahulse  primx,  to  which  belong  wor- 
ship in  an  internal  and  external  sense  and  therefore  also 
love  to  God;  3)  opera  moralia  tabulse  seciindse,  to  which 
belongs  love  to  our  neighbor,  which  manifests  itself  in  a 
variety  of  ways.  In  every  case  God  sees  all  of  these  deeds 
and  in  many  cases  they  are  seen  and  observed  by  our  neigh- 
bors also. 

The  quality  of  the  bona  opera  is  set  forth  in  the  Scrip- 
tures in  figures  of  speech,  such  as  gold,  silver,  precious 
stones,  etc.  Compare  1  Cor.  3:  12—15;  2  Tim.  2:  19—21. 
Although  the  first  passage  on  account  of  the  context  must 
be  applied  in  a  primary  sense  to  the  teachers  of  the  Word 
as  to  how  they  build  on  the  foundation,  still  there  are 
lessons  to  be  drawn  in  the  interest  of  sanctification  for 
Christians  in  general.  All  Christians  build  on  the  same 
foundation,  but  they  do  not  all  build  alike.  The  works  of 
some  are  like  gold,  silver  and  costly  stones,  while  the  works 
of  others  are  like  wood,  hay  and  stubble.  The  quality  of 
sanctification,  therefore,  is  of  great  importance  before  God. 
and  this  not  only  for  time,  but  also  for  eternity.    This  phase 


EEXOVATION.  361 

of  the  matter  is  clearly  presented  in  vv.  14  and  15.  There 
are,  besides,  so-called  Christians  who  bear  no  fruit,  an  evi- 
dence of  the  fact  that  they  have  become  withered  branches. 
This  condition  denotes  that  they  have  lost  their  salvation. 
They  withered  because  they  did  not  abide  in  Christ.  Com- 
pare John  15 :  2 — 6.  But  true  Christians  desire  to  bear 
fruit  and  to  build  in  such  a  fashion  on  the  true  foundation 
that  their  works  shall  stand  the  test  of  the  fiery  trial.  This 
does  not  always  mean  that  they  shall  stand  the  test  in  their 
own  estimation  or  in  the  estimation  of  others,  but  God 
judges  a  righteous  judgment.  The  deep-seated  desire  of 
all  true  Christians  is  to  follow  after  sanctification,  without 
which  no  man  shall  see  the  Lord.    Cf .  Heb.  12 :  14. 

4.    The  Object  of  Renovation. 

Finis  proximus  is  the  same  as  the  term  terminus  ad  quern, 
i.  e.,  the  new  man.  Renovation  has  its  beginning,  its  con- 
tinuance and  its  completion.  The  Holy  Spirit  is  continually 
occupied  with  the  gracious  work  of  restoring  man  to  the 
likeness  of  God,  i.  e.,  to  the  divine  image  in  which  he  was 
originally  created.  If  man  had  remained  in  the  original 
state  of  integrity,  he  would  have  developed  more  and  more 
until  he  had  become  prepared  for  entrance  into  the  world 
of  glory.  In  accordance  with  the  divine  plan  of  salvation 
the  same  work  is  now  accomplished  in  another  way.  This 
work,  however,  is  hid  from  the  eyes  of  the  world,  and  in 
certain  cases  also  from  the  Christians  themselves,  since  our 
life  is  hid  with  Christ  in  God.  Compare  Col.  3 :  1 — 10.  The 
Christians,  nevertheless,  experience  the  activity  of  the 
Spirit  of  the  Lord.  If  they  remain  faithful,  the  new  man 
will  in  due  season  become  complete.  But  renovation  has 
also  a  final  goal,  finis  ultimus,  which  is  life  eternal  and  the 
glory  of  God.  This  object  possesses  great  significance,  in- 
asmuch as  the  glory  belongs  to  God  and  He  is  glorified 
through  the  salvation  of  man. 


362  rxKT:\rATOT.o(;v. 

§31.     CONSERVATION. 

Since  the  object  of  the  next  preceding  acts  of  grace  is  the 
salvation  of  the  believers,  therefore  it  is  of  importance  that 
those  persons  who  have  been  regenerated  and  are  in  a  state 
of  sanctification  be  preserved  and  that  they  endure  in  faith 
even  unto  the  end.  Someone  has  said  that  from  a  human 
point  of  view  it  is  not  an  easy  matter  to  become  a  Christian, 
but  it  is  more  difficult  to  remain  a  Christian.  The  gate  is 
narrow  on  account  of  sin,  although  the  grace  of  God  is 
abundant,  but  the  way  is  strait  and  in  the  case  of  some  it 
may  be  too  long.  On  this  account  conservatio  is  of  vast  im- 
portance as  an  act  of  grace.  To  this  belongs  perseverantia 
fidelium.  It  is  true  that  conservatio  can  be  subordinated 
under  renovatio,  but  it  can  also  be  considered  as  a  special 
act  of  grace.  Hollazius  does  this  when  he  treats  of  gratia 
conservans  or  the  doctrine  of  God's  preserving  grace. 

1.    The  Definition  of  Conservation. 

Conservation  is  that  act  of  grace  ivherehy  the  regener- 
ated person  is  preserved  in  true  faith  especially  through  the 
right  use  of  the  means  of  grace  so  that  he  does  not  ftnally 
fall,  but  is  at  last  redeemed  and  admitted  into  the  kingdom 
of  glory.  HOLLAZius  defines  as  follows:*  ''Conservatio  is 
that  act  of  grace  whereby  the  Holy  Spirit,  who  dwells  in 
justified  and  renovated  men,  preserves  them  through  super- 
natural powers  from  the  temptations  of  the  devil,  the  world 
and  the  flesh,  through  which  they  are  tempted  to  sin  and 
apostasy  from  God,  confirms  and  increases  their  faith  and 
the  sanctity  of  their  life,  so  that  they  do  not  fall  from  the 
state  of  grace,  but  are  preserved  in  it  and  eternally  saved." 

In  a  primary  sense  it  is  the  Triune  God  and  instrumenta- 
liter the  Holy  Spirit  that  preserves  the  regenerated  man, 

♦HoLLAZH's:  "Conservatio  est  actus  gratiae  quo  Spiritus  sanctus 
habitans  in  hominibus  justificatis  et  renovatis,  hos  adversus  diaboli, 
niundi  et  carnis  tentationes,  quibus  ad  peccatum  ac  apostaslam  a  Deo 
solicitantur,  supernaturalibus  viribus  praemunit,  fidemque  ipsorum  et 
vitae  sanctitatem  confirmat  et  auget,  ne  e  statu  gratis  excidant,  sed  in 
eodem  perseverent,  et  seternum  salventur." 


t'O.NSKHVATIOX.  363 

but  in  a  secondary  sense  preservation  takes  place  through 
the  concursus  that  is  active  by  reason  of  the  spiritual 
powers  granted  to  the  regenerated  man.  Gratia  cooperans 
is  therefore  active  in  conservation.  Conservation  does  not 
therefore  depend  upon  an  arbitrary  decision,  and  the  grace 
of  conservation  is  not  a  gratia  irresistibilis,  as  many  of  the 
Reformed  declare.  The  Calvinists  and  therefore  many  of 
the  Reformed  teach  that  the  truly  regenerated  man,  who  is 
therefore  elect  in  accordance  with  the  doctrine  of  uncondi- 
tional predestination,  cannot  fall.  The  Lutheran  Church 
emphasizes  the  responsibility  of  the  Christian  in  the  exer- 
cise of  his  Christian  freedom,  but  at  the  same  time  stresses 
the  preserving  grace  of  God,  since  without  the  grace  of 
God  no  man  can  be  preserved.  But  some  Christians  may 
fall.  They  may  fall  many  times,  and  finally  be  lost.  It 
may  also  happen  that  they  fall  from  the  grace  of  God  and 
finally  are  restored  and  saved.  The  old  Dogmaticians  speak 
of  apostasia  as  duplex:  dogmatica  et  moralis.  By  apostasia 
dogmatica  is  meant  such  a  departure  from  the  true  teaching 
as  to  extinguish  the  saving  faith.  Apostasia  moralis  is  the 
intentional  abandonment  of  the  exercise  of  sanctification 
coupled  with  the  practise  of  evil  deeds  as  finally  to  result 
in  the  shipwreck  of  faith.    Cf .  1  Tim.  4 :  1 ;  1  Tim.  1 :  19. 

Among  Scripture  passages  that  present  the  preserving 
grace  of  God  together  with  the  responsible  co-operation  of 
the  Christian  the  following  may  be  quoted:  "Being  con- 
fident of  this  very  thing,  that  he  who  began  a  good  work 
in  you  will  perfect  it  until  the  day  of  Jesus  Christ"  (Phil. 
1:6);  "Faithful  is  he  that  calleth  you,  who  will  also  do  it" 
(1  Thess.  5:  24)  ;  "Who  by  the  power  of  God  are  guarded" 
(1  Peter  1 :  5 ;  cf .  John  10:  28,  29;  2  Tim.  4:  17,  18)  ;  "If 
a  man  abide  not  in  me,  he  is  cast  forth,"  etc.  (John  15:  6)  ; 
"And  in  like  manner  the  Spirit  also  helpeth  our  infirmity" 
(Rom.  8:  26;  1  Cor.  1:  4 — 9)  ;  "Perfecting  holiness  in  the 
fear  of  God"  (2  Cor.  7:1);  "Stand  fast  therefore"  (Gal. 
5:1);  "Let  us  run  with  patience  the  race"  (Heb.  12:  1)  ; 
"Be  thou  faithful  unto  death"  (Rev.  2:  10). 


364  r.NKl"  MATOLOG  V. 

2.    The  Means  and  Manner  of  Conservation. 

The  primary  means  are  the  means  of  grace.  If  we  con- 
sider Baptism  as  the  basis  of  the  new  life,  then  the  means 
are  the  Word  of  God  and  the  Lord's  Supper.  God  works 
through  these  means,  and  the  Christian  must  make  diligent 
use  of  them.  Co-operation  takes  place,  but  the  means  are 
divine  and  the  powers  of  man  are  granted  powers.  No  one 
can  be  preserved  who  does  not  use  the  Word  of  God  in  ac- 
cordance with  the  directions  of  Scripture.  God  has  not 
promised  to  preserve  anyone  in  an  immediate  way.  The 
means  of  grace  are  not  primary  in  the  sense  that  there  are 
other  means  that  could  be  employed  to  the  neglect  of  the 
means  of  grace.  The  Word  of  God  and  the  Sacraments  are 
necessary  for  us  in  order  to  be  preserved.  The  Lord's 
Supper  is  therefore  also  necessary  as  a  means  of  grace  for 
preservation  in  the  faith,  although  not  in  the  same  sense 
as  the  Word.  A  wilful  neglect  of  the  Lord's  Supper  is  dead- 
ening to  faith. 

There  are,  besides,  secondary  means,  which,  however,  are 
dependent  on  the  Word  of  God  and  set  forth  in  the  Scrip- 
tures as  necessary.  The  secondary  means  are  therefore  in 
reality  the  putting  into  practice  of  the  primary  means  under 
various  conditions.  These  are :  Prayer  in  the  name  of  Jesus, 
watchfulness,  and  an  earnest  fight  against  all  the  internal 
and  external  enemies  that  may  hinder  preservation  in  the 
faith.  It  is  often  necessarj^  for  the  Lord  to  chastise  the 
Christians  in  order  that  they  may  more  diligently  use  the 
means  of  grace  together  with  the  auxiliary  means  here  set 
forth  which  are  dependent  on  the  primary  means  of  grace. 
This  chastisement  may  be  either  internal  or  external,  gen- 
eral or  special.  The  Christians  are  preserved  in  faith  by 
bearing  the  cross  of  suffering. 

HOLLAZius*  presents  the  formal  statement  in  reference 
to  the  preservation  of  the  faithful  when  he  answers  the 
question:  In  quo  formaliter  consistit  conservatio  fidelium? 
He  says  that  conservatio  comprises  three  acts  of  grace: 


*  Exam.  Theol.  Acroam.    Pars  III,  §1,  Cap.  xr,  p.  416. 


CONSERVATION.  365 

1)  gratia  prasservans  sen  prasmmiiens,  which  means  that 
God  preserves  the  faithful  in  granting  to  them  supernatural 
powers  against  temptations  and  all  enemies.  James  4 :  6, 
7;  1  John  5:  4,  5;  Jude  24';  2)  gratia  confirmans  et  con- 
solans,  when  God  strengthens  and  consoles  the  faithful 
through  the  means  of  grace.  2  Cor.  1 :  21,  22 ;  1  Cor.  1 :  4 
— 9;  1  Peter  1:  3 — 12;  3)  gratia  locupletans,  or  the  grace 
by  which  the  believers  receive  more  and  more  of  the  riches 
of  the  divine  grace,  being  thereby  so  strengthened  as  to  be 
able  to  endure  until  the  victory  is  won.  Col.  1:  9 — 11;  2 
Peter  1:  3—11;  3:  18;  Eph.  3:  14—21. 

3.    The  Goal  of  Conservation. 

Finis  vroximus  is  perseverayitia,  by  which  is  meant  that 
the  believer  is  preserved  and  that  he  endures  until  the  end. 
Perseverantia  has,  however,  been  characterized  either  as 
teyn/poraria  or  as  finalis.  For  examples  of  temporaria  read 
Matt.  13:  20,  21.  Some  endure  for  a  long  time,  but  finally 
succumb.  Perseverantia  finalis  is  either  continua  or  inter- 
rupta.  Some  Christians  fall  because  of  the  weakness  of  the 
flesh,  but  are  restored  again  and  endure  to  the  end  of  life, 
wherefore  their  persevei'antia  is  called  interrupta. 

The  personal  assurance  of  the  Christians  with  regard  to 
their  endurance  or  their  certitudo  is  no7i  absoluta,  sed  ordi- 
nata  et  conditio7iata.  In  this  conditional  sense  the  Chris- 
tians may  be  certain  and  happy  by  reason  of  the  Word  and 
promises  of  the  Lord.  God  has  promised  His  help  (1  Cor. 
1 :  8,  9)  ;  the  Son  intercedes  for  them  (John  17)  ;  they  are 
sealed  with  the  Spirit  until  the  day  of  redemption  (Eph.  4: 
30).  At  times  their  assurance  and  confidence  may  rise  to 
the  heights  of  glorious  triumph.    Cf .  Rom.  8 :  35 — 39. 

Finis  idtimus  coyiservationis  is  naturally,  as  in  the  pre- 
ceding acts  of  grace,  the  eternal  salvation  of  the  believers 
together  with  the  glory  of  God.  The  goal  is  reached  when 
the  believers  have  been  preserved  until  the  end  and  they 
have  been  privileged  to  enter  into  the  state  of  glory. 


VI.     ECCLESIOLOGY 


ECCLESIOLOGY  is  that  part  of  Dogmatics  which  treats  of 
the  doctrine  of  the  Church  and  the  manner  of  her  working. 
In  the  section  on  Pneumatology  we  dealt  with  the  gracious 
work  of  the  Holy  Spirit,  which  is  performed  in  the  Church 
of  Christ,  so  that  the  Church  may  be  styled  the  "workshop" 
of  the  Holy  Ghost.  Ecclesiology  defines  in  the  first  place 
the  concept  of  the  Church.  But  the  Holy  Spirit  works 
through  means,  and  for  this  reason  the  doctrine  of  the 
Word  and  the  Sacraments  constitutes  the  dominating  sub- 
ject in  Ecclesiology.  The  Founder  of  the  Church  also  estab- 
lished an  office  to  administer  the  means  of  grace  through 
which  the  Holy  Spirit  works,  and  for  this  reason  Ecclesiology 
also  sets  forth  the  doctrine  of  the  Christian  Ministry. 


§32.    THE  CHURCH. 

The  great  day  of  Pentecost  was  the  birthday  of  the 
Church  when  the  Holy  Spirit  was  poured  out  and  His 
specific  work  begun.  In  a  certain  sense,  to  be  sure,  the 
Church  had  existed  before,  since  the  community  life  of  reli- 
gion did  not  originate  on  the  day  of  Pentecost.  In  its 
essence  religion  is  a  unifying  force  uniting  God  and  men 
with  one  another  and  the  children  of  men  with  each  other. 
On  the  day  of  Pentecost,  the  real  birthday  of  the  Church, 
religion  appeared  in  its  mature  form.  Christianity,  which 
is  the  true  essense  of  religion,  then  entered  upon  the  stage 
of  complete  activity.  Christianity  is  life  and  its  present 
organism  is  the  Church.  The  Church  is  God's  creation, 
and  within  her  fold  are  born  the  children  that  shall  become 
members  of  the  kingdom  of  eternal  glory. 


THE   CHURCH.  3G7 


1.    Definition. 


ECCLESIA,  0?'  the  Church,  is  the  comminiion  of  saints,  in 
which  the  Word  of  God  is  taught  in  its  pnrity  ayid  the  Sacra- 
ments are  administered  in  accordance  tvith  the  institution  of 
Christ.  The  concept  of  the  Church  therefore  embodies  two 
elements,  each  one  of  which  must  be  given  proper  emphasis, 
since  otherwise  misconceptions  may  arise  such  as  we  find 
prevailing  in  the  high-church  and  low-church  groups  of  the 
Church.  Historically  speaking,  these  tendencies  are  to  be 
found  in  the  Roman  Catholic  Church  and  among  the  Re- 
formed sects.  The  definition  of  the  Church  would  not  be 
complete  if  it  were  simply  defined  unqualifiedly  as  the  com- 
munion of  saints,  since  in  that  case  the  communion  might 
be  conceived  of  as  being  invisible,  without  any  external 
form  of  appearance.  On  the  other  hand,  it  would  not  be 
sufficient  to  say  simply  that  the  Church  is  a  communion 
where  the  means  of  grace  are  administered,  since  it  is  neces- 
sary to  emphasize  the  fact  that  the  Church  is  not  merely 
a  politia  externa,  as  the  Catholics  teach,  but  that  it  is  a 
congregatio  sanctorum.  The  communion  of  saints  on  the 
earth  cannot  be  found  apart  from  the  means  of  grace,  but 
where  the  means  of  grace  are  found  and  used,  there  faith 
will  be  effected ;  there  will  also  be  found  believers  and 
saints,  and  as  a  result  a  communion  of  believers  among 
whom  the  means  of  grace  are  administered.  The  one  can- 
not be  separated  from  the  other.  However,  the  expression 
congregatio  sanctorum  does  not  imply  that  the  actual 
Church  consists  only  of  believers,  since  by  reason  of  the 
historical  development  of  the  Church  together  with  other 
circumstances  it  is  practically  impossible  to  prevent  hypo- 
crites and  unbelievers  from  belonging  to  the  visible  church. 
However,  the  Church  always  strives  to  reach  the  ideal,  al- 
though the  militant  Church  on  earth  can  never  become  a 
completely  triumphant  Church. 

Ecclesia  stricte  dicta  comprises  therefore  the  believing 
members  within  the  Church  who  use  the  means  of  grace, 
i.  e.,  when  we  consider  the  Church  in  this  world.    Ecclesia 


368  ,  ECCI.ESIOI.OGY. 

late  dicta  is  the  term  applied  to  the  Church  by  the  use  of 
a  common  figure  of  speech,  synecdoche,  which  puts  a  part 
for  the  whole,  and  by  which  that  which  belongs  only  to  a 
part  is  ascribed  to  the  entire  communion  consisting  of  both 
believers  and  unbelievers. 

There  are  not,  however,  two  churches,  one  a  true  and 
internal,  the  other  a  nominal  and  external,  church,  but  the 
Church  is  one  and  the  same,  namely,  the  assembly  of  the 
called  considered  from  two  different  aspects:  tVwötv  and 
£^wÖ£v.  HUTTERUS  says:  "Although  it  is  not  sufficient  for 
salvation  that  you  are  a  member  of  the  Church  described 
in  this  general  manner  and  only  in  relation  to  the  external 
confession  of  the  Christian  faith,  still  it  is  true  that  salva- 
tion is  not  to  be  found  outside  of  this  communion.  In  this 
connection  the  comparison  to  Noah's  ark  is  applicable,  for 
inasmuch  as  no  one  was  saved  during  the  flood  outside  the 
ark,  and  yet  not  all  who  were  in  the  ark  were  on  that  ac- 
count saved  unto  everlasting  life,  so  no  one  is  saved  outside 
the  Church,  and  yet  all  are  not  saved  that  belong  to  the 
Church  in  the  general  sense."  With  regard  to  the  Church 
considered  stricte  dicta  the  assertion  is  absolutely  appli- 
cable :  extra  ecclesiam  nulla  salus. 

Among  the  Scripture  passages  that  set  forth  the  real 
nature  of  the  Church,  stricte  dicta,  the  following  may  be 
cited :  "So  we,  who  are  many,  are  one  body  in  Christ"  (Rom. 
12:  5)  ;  "The  church,  which  is  his  body,  the  fulness  of  him 
that  filleth  all  in  all"  (Eph.  1 :  22,  23)  ;  "The  house  of  God, 
which  is  the  church  of  the  living  God"  (1  Tim.  3  :  15) .  This 
latter  passage  may  apply  to  the  Church  in  its  twofold  char- 
acter. The  following  passages  present  to  a  greater  or  less 
degree  the  Church  considered  late  dicta  or  as  it  appears 
actually  or  in  history:  "Take  heed  unto  yourselves,  and  to 
all  the  flock,  in  the  which  the  Holy  Ghost  hath  made  you 
bishops,  to  feed  the  church  of  God"  (Acts  20 :  28)  ;  "He 
that  prophesieth  edifieth  the  church"  (1  Cor.  14:  4)  ;  "The 
church  of  God  which  is  at  Corinth"  (1  Cor.  1:2;  compare 
the  conditions  as  described  in  1  Cor.  5:1,  etc.).  The  con- 
gregations to  which  the  apostolical  letters  as  well  as  the 


iiir;  caiUKCii.  369 

letters  of  Christ  are  addressed  present  the  Church  in  a  real 
sense  as  a  communion  of  saints  where  the  means  of  grace 
are  administered,  but  whose  membership  also  includes 
hypocrites  and  unbelievers.  The  parables  of  Christ  also 
present  the  Church  in  the  same  manner.  But  essentially 
the  Church  is  not  a  communion  of  believers  and  unbelievers, 
but  the  communion  of  saints. 

Inasmuch  as  the  definition  of  the  Church  states  that  it 
is  the  communion  of  saints  in  which  the  Word  of  God  is 
taught  in  its  purity  and  the  Sacraments  are  administered 
according  to  the  institution  of  Christ,  the  question  may 
arise  as  to  whether  a  church  exists  in  case  the  Word  of  God 
in  its  entirety  is  not  taught  in  its  purity  and  the  Sacraments 
are  not  rightly  understood  and  administered.  The  Augs- 
burg Confession  does  not  deal  with  this  question,  but  seems 
to  acknowledge  that  the  Roman  Church  is  a  Church  of  God. 
Billing*  says  in  this  connection:  "One  would  surely  not 
go  far  wrong  in  assuming  that  the  Lutheran  Church,  with 
regard  to  the  degree  of  purity  required,  would  limit  itself 
to  the  following,  that  the  means  of  grace  be  so  administered 
that  faith  may  thereby  be  brought  about."  The  Lutheran 
Church  does  not  claim  that  she  alone  is  the  Church  of  Christ 
on  earth,  but  she  does  assert  that  the  true  Church  ought 
to  be  such  that  within  her  the  Word  of  God  be  purely 
preached  and  the  Sacraments  administered  according  to 
the  institution  of  Christ.  Otherwise  the  Church  is  not. 
normal.  When  Christians  unite  to  form  a  church  but  do 
not  teach  in  accordance  with  the  whole  Word  of  God,  then 
such  a  church  is  abnormal  to  that  extent.  In  defining  the 
Church  it  is  necessary  to  set  forth  its  true  essence  and 
character.  The  Lutheran  Church  lays  great  stress  on  true 
harmony  between  faith  and  doctrine.  The  Lutheran  Church 
desires  to  be  and  confesses  herself  to  be  a  church  that  faith- 
fully abides  by  the  Word  of  God.  For  this  reason  she  could 
not  set  forth  a  different  conception  of  the  Church  from  that 
which  is  presented  in  the  definition.    She  does  not,  however, 

*  Luth.  Kyrkans  Bekännelse,  p.  482. 

Dogmatics.     13. 


370  KCCLKSIOI.OC.Y. 

assume  an  exclusive  attitude  and  sit  in  judgment  upor. 
others,  as  does  the  Roman  Catholic  Church,  not  to  speak 
of  certain  ultra-Protestant  and  separatistic  sects. 

2.  The  Founder  and  Head  of  the  Church. 
Causa  efficiens  ecclesise  is  the  Triune  God  and  especially 
Christ  the  God-man.  Causa  impulsiva  interna  is  the  good- 
ness or  gracious  favor  of  God.  Causa  impulsiva  externa 
is  Christ  by  reason  of  His  mediatorial  office.  Caput  ecclesi^, 
or  the  Head  of  the  Church,  is  Christ.  He  occupies  this 
position  not  only  by  reason  of  His  superior  eminence  above 
the  members,  but  also  because  of  the  moral  and  physical  or 
real  influence,  which,  according  to  both  natures.  He  exerts 
over  the  members  of  His  mystical  body  or  the  Church. 
Influxus  Christi,  or  the  influence  of  Christ,   is  tw^ofold: 

1)  moralis,  which  consists  in  this,  that  Christ,  by  virtue  of 
His  merit,  has  acquired  all  spiritual  blessings  (Eph.  1:  3)  ; 

2)  physicus  sive  realis,  which  implies  the  operative  activity 
of  Christ  in  the  Church  in  accordance  with  His  promise  to 
be  with  His  disciples  always,  even  unto  the  end  of  the  world. 
He  is  the  head  of  the  Church  in  a  real  sense  and  directs  all 
things  for  the  welfare  of  the  whole  Church  as  well  as  the 
individual  members. 

We  therefore  reject  the  Roman  Catholic  doctrine  that 
Peter  became  the  head  of  the  Church  and  the  vicar  of 
Christ,  and  that  the  pope  is  his  successor.  With  regard"  to 
the  interpretation  of  Matt.  16 :  18  the  Protestant  theologians 
understand  the  "rock"  to  mean  the  confession  of  Peter. 
Christ  Himself  is  declared  to  be  the  foundation.  Compare 
1  Cor.  3:  11.  Note  also  the  twentieth  verse  of  the  same 
chapter,  which  says,  "Let  no  one  glory  in  men."  With 
regard  to  the  keys  it  may  be  stated  that  they  were  entrusted 
not  only  to  Peter,  but  to  others  as  well.  Compare  Matt.  18 : 
18 :  "What  things  soever  ye  shall  bind  on  earth  shall  be 
bound  in  heaven :  and  what  things  soever  ye  shall  loose  on 
earth  shall  be  loosed  in  heaven."  Compare  John  20 :  21 — 23. 
Not  only  Peter  but  also  James  and  John  are  called  pillars. 
Cf .  Gal.  2 :  9. 


THE   CHURCH.  371 

Some  theologians  interpret  the  "rock"  to  mean  not  only 
the  confession  of  Peter  but  also  Peter  as  a  confessor  be- 
coming thereby  an  ideal  Christian  confessor.  In  this  spe- 
cial character  he  became  the  norm  for  all  confessors,  who 
also  are  living  stones  in  the  building.  Compare  Eph.  2 : 
20 — 22.  P'or  this  reason  TrtVpos  is  also  changed  to  Trirpa  in 
Matt.  16:  18.  For  further  study  compare  the  following 
passages :  Matt.  16 :  18 ;  Mark  8 :  27—30 ;  Luke  9  :  18—21 ; 
John  1 :  41 — 43,  where  Simon  for  the  first  time  is  called 
Petros,  but  in  Matt.  16:  18  he  has  come  to  deserve  the 
name;  Rom.  15:  20;  1  Cor.  3:  4—11;  Eph.  2:  20—22.  Some 
commentators  have  interpreted  the  expression  "The  founda- 
tion of  the  apostles  and  prophets"  as  a  genetivus  apposi- 
tivus  (Chrysostom,  Olshausen,  DeWette  and  others),  others 
say  that  it  is  a  genitivus  originis  (Calvin,  Harless,  Meyer, 
Ellicott  and  others),  while  still  others  say  that  it  is  a  geni- 
tivus possessivus  (Beza,  Bucer,  Alford,  etc.).  Some  theo- 
logians accept  all  three  interpretations.  Compare  Gal.  2 : 
9 ;  1  Tim.  3 :  15 ;  1  Peter  2 :  4,  5  and  Rev.  21 :  14. 

3.    Materia  et  Forma  Ecclesi^. 

By  materia  ecclesix  the  old  Dogmaticians  mean  the  be- 
lievers or  the  saints.  Some  have  used  the  expression  "the 
elect,"  but  to  avoid  misunderstandings  the  expression  "the 
communion  of  saints"  is  used  instead  of  "the  communion 
of  the  elect."  The  Church  is  therefore  the  communion  of 
saints,  the  assembly  of  believers  and  the  household  of  God. 

Forma  ecclesix  comprises  the  assembly  of  the  believers 
and  saints,  who  as  members  of  the  Church  are  united  with 
the  head  of  the  Church,  even  Christ,  through  a  true  and 
living  faith,  which  is  followed  by  the  union  and  communion 
of  the  members  in  true  love. 

The  Christians  do  not  stand  in  isolation  but  in  the  closest 
union  and  communion  with  Christ  and  with  one  another. 
An  intelligent  Christian  therefore  can  not  support  a  one- 
sided individualism,  be  it  religious  or  ecclesiastical.  The 
individual  Christian  must  not  concentrate  all  his  interests 
in  himself,  he  must  be  ever  ready  in  love  to  serve  his  Master 


372  ECCLESIOLOGY. 

and  fellow  saints  in  the  kingdom  on  whose  banner  are  in- 
scribed the  words,  Faith,  Love  and  Hope.  There  are  many 
Scripture  passages  that  speak  of  this  loving  relationship. 
"But  he  that  is  joined  unto  the  Lord  is  one  spirit"  (1  Cor. 
6:  17)  ;  "One  body  and  one  spirit"  (Eph.  4:4);  "By  this 
shall  all  men  know  that  ye  are  my  disciples,  if  ye  have  love 
one  to  another"  (John  13:  35).  By  reason  of  our  earthly 
imperfections  this  love  does  not  always  manifest  itself  as 
it  should;  however,  all  true  Christians  love  each  other,  al- 
though they  cannot  love  all  with  the  same  degree  of  in- 
tensity, nor  every  trait  or  characteristic  of  the  individual 
Christian. 

4.    The  Attributes  of  the  Church. 

The  attributes  of  the  Church  are  of  two  kinds,  some  more 
general  and  symbolical,  others  more  particular. 

A.  Attrihuta  ecclesise  viilgo:  1)  Una.  The  Church  is 
one  and  undivided  because  the  members  of  the  Church  are 
united  in  Christ  as  the  head,  which  union  implies  not  only 
love  to  God  but  also  to  our  neighbor.  Furthermore,  we  say 
that  the  Church  is  one  and  no  more  because  it  does  not 
acknowledge  a  plurality  of  assemblies  of  the  same  nature 
and  existing  simultaneously,  inasmuch  as  the  Church 
catholic  is  the  communion  of  saints,  in  which  sense  there 
cannot  be  more  than  one  such  holy  communion.  The  Church 
is  also  one  because  there  cannot  be  a  succeeding  church. 
The  Church  has  always  existed  and  will  ever  continue  to 
exist  unto  the  end  of  the  world.  2)  Sancta.  The  Church 
is  holy  because  Christ  its  head  is  holy  in  the  absolute  sense 
and  because  its  members  are  justified  and  sanctified,  ever 
striving  after  perfect  holiness.  It  is  also  holy  because  the 
means  of  grace  through  which  the  Holy  Ghost  works  in  the' 
hearts  of  men  are  holy ;  likewise  because  the  whole  purpose 
and  aim  of  all  its  activity  is  spiritual  and  heavenly,  so  that 
it  is  not  of  the  world,  although  in  the  world.  3)  CatJwlica. 
The  Church  is  catholic  (kuÖ  o\ov)  both  with  respect  to  its 
orthodoxy,  confessing  the  faith  which  was  once  for  all  de- 
livered unto  the  saints,  and  with  respect  to  its  extent,  being 


THE   CHURCH.  373 

spread  over  the  entire  globe  and  among  all  people.  4) 
ApostoUca.  The  Church  is  called  apostolic  because  it  was 
founded  through  the  mediation  of  the  apostles,  confesses 
their  teachings  and  is  built  up  on  the  foundation  laid  by 
the  prophets  and  the  apostles. 

B.  Attnbuta  ecclesix  particularia:  1)  Visibilis  et  invisi- 
bilis,  or  visible  and  invisible.  The  Church  is  visible  as  an 
assembly  of  the  called  and  baptized  who  are  members  of 
particular  churches  which  use  the  means  of  grace  and  carry 
on  religious  work,  but  it  is  not  visible  in  the  sense  that  we 
know  for  a  certainty  who  in  each  particular  assembly  are 
members  of  the  ecclesia  stricte  dicta.  We  may,  however, 
be  certain  of  the  fact  that  the  true  Church  is  found  in  the 
visible  Church,  inasmuch  as  the  baptized  infants  and  small 
children  are  members  of  the  body  of  Christ,  and  where  the 
means  of  grace  are  used  they  must  always  be  efficacious. 
It  is  hardly  possible  that  a  Christian  congregation  can  be 
found  where  true  Christian's  would  be  altogether  wanting. 
But  the  Cliurch  is  invisible  with  respect  to  the  believers  or 
the  elect  and  their  hidden  life  with  God  and  spiritual  com- 
munion. The  spiritual  gifts  are  likewise  invisible.  We 
may  also  say  that  the  Church  is  invisible  because  Christ,  the 
mystical  head,  is  not  present  in  a  visible  manner,  while 
many,  nay  most,  of  its  members  are  no  longer  upon  earth. 
But  the  invisible  Church  on  the  earth  is  found  in  the  visible 
Church  like  the  soul  in  the  body.  Some  Christians  would 
belong  to  the  invisible  Church,  but  not  the  visible,  although 
it  is  the  visible  Church  that  administers  the  means  of  grace. 
This  is  certainly  just  as  abnormal  as  if  the  soul  were  out- 
side the  body.  All  true  and  sensible  Christians  therefore 
desire  to  be  members  of  the  visible  Church,  i.  e.,  to  be  re- 
corded as  members  in  some  Christian  congregation.  2) 
Universalis  et  particularis.  The  Church  is  universal  both 
in  place  and  ti7ne.  With  respect  to  place  the  Church  is  uni- 
versal because  its  goal  is  to  extend  its  activity  into  all  the 
world.  With  respect  to  time  it  is  universal  inasmuch  as  it 
extends  through  all  time,  so  that  it  has  been  in  existence 
from  the  beginning  of  time,  exists  now  and  shall  continue 


374  KCCLK.SIOLOCIY. 

to  exist.  It  might  seem  as  though  the  two  terms  universalis 
and  catholica  were  expressive  of  the  same  thing,  which  is 
indeed  true  to  a  certain  extent,  although  the  term  catholica 
stresses  particularly  that  which  is  general  and  common  in 
doctrine.  All  particular  churches,  therefore,  comprising 
as  they  do  the  different  sections  of  the  Church  Universal 
acknowledge  the  ecumenical  creeds,  while  the  sectarian 
groups,  although  true  Christians  may  be  found  among  them 
nevertheless  tear  themselves  away  from  the  traditional 
trunk  of  the  general  ecclesiastical  tree,  reject  all  that  which 
is  ecumenical,  including  the  fixed  symbols  of  the  Church 
Universal,  and  accept  that  which  is  individual  and  per- 
sonally characteristic.  The  Church  is  particularis,  not  as 
a  whole,  but  as  divided.  It  is  particularis  with  respect  to 
time,  e.  g.,  the  Church  of  the  Old  or  of  the  New  Testament. 
It  is  particularis  with  respect  to  place  and  location,  e.  g.,  in 
a  country,  in  a  city,  etc.  The  Church  is  likewise  particu- 
laris from  the  confessional  viewpoint,  such  as  the  Greek 
Catholic,  the  Roman  Catholic,  the  Lutheran,  the*  Reformed 
Church.  3)  Pura  et  vera.  Pura  is  contrasted  with  impura 
and  vera  with  falsa.  The  purpose  in  the  use  of  these  terms 
is  to  state  that  particular  churches  may  be  pure  and  true 
in  varying  degrees,  while  some  may  be  the  reverse.  A  pure 
Church  is  one  in  which  the  Word  of  God  is  taught  in  its 
purity  and  the  Sacraments  are  rightly  administered.  But 
even  if  the  Word  of  God  is  not  preached  purely  in  its  en- 
tirety, still  there  is  a  Church,  although  relatively  impure, 
provided  that  the  Word  of  God  is  preached  in  such  manner 
that  souls  may  be  saved.  A  man  is  a  man  even  though 
certain  parts  of  the  body  may  be  injured.  However,  certain 
organs  are  necessary,  such  as  the  head,  the  heart  and  the 
lungs.  A  Church  may  become  so  heretical  in  essential  doc- 
trines that  it  can  no  longer  be  counted  as  a  Christian 
Church.  But  even  with  respect  to  relatively  unessential 
members  of  the  body  it  is  desirable  that  we  possess  the  per- 
fect use  of  all  of  them  in  healthy  condition.  "The  same  con- 
ditions obtain  with  regard  to  the  churches.  Even  if  men 
may  be  saved  in  an  ecclesia  impura,  still  every  intelligent 


THE   CHURCH.  375 

Christian  understands  that  it  is  better  to  belong  to  an 
ecclesia  pura  where  the  Word  of  God  is  taught  in  its  purity 
and  the  Sacraments  are  rightly  administered.  In  speaking 
of  true  and  false  churches  there  is  no  thought  of  any  oppo- 
sitional relationship,  as  between  the  Christian  Church  and 
false  religions,  rather  the  question  concerns  the  different 
churches  in  Christendom  which  either  teach  the  Word  of 
God  correctly  or  falsify  their  teachings  with  heresies.  There 
are  some  who  have  misunderstood  the  concept  of  a  pure 
Church,  declaring  it  to  be  a  congregation  of  believers  only. 
However,  such  a  pure  Church  can  never  be  realized  on  earth 
for  any  length  of  time.  Even  if  such  a  congregation  might 
be  organized  among  a  limited  group  of  Christians,  still 
there  would  soon  appear  backsliders  and  unbelievers.  The 
parables  of  our  Lord,  the  apostolical  epistles,  the  letters  of 
Jesus  to  the  seven  churches  prove  conclusively  that  a  pure 
Church  is  beyond  the  limits  of  possibility  on  the  earth. 
Some  separatists  have  misinterpreted  2  Cor.  6:  14 — 18  as 
an  admonition  to  withdraw  from  a  congregation  in  which 
the  majority  of  the  members  would  seem  to  be  unregener- 
ated.  It  is  evident  that  Paul  did  not  admonish  the  believers 
in  the  congregation  at  Corinth  to  leave  the  congregation, 
rather  the  admonition  concerned  the  relationship  of  the 
Christians  to  unbelievers  outside  of  the  congregation.  We 
do  not  mean  to  say  that  unbelievers  are  normal  members  of 
the  Church,  for  only  believers  are  true  members.  It  is  the 
duty  of  each  congregation  to  exercise  the  power  of  church 
discipline  in  accordance  with  the  Word  of  God.  4)  Sy?}- 
thetica  sive  collectiva  et  represeyitativa.  By  the  former  is 
meant  the  Church  in  its  entirety,  while  by  the  latter  is 
meant  the  Church  in  a  representative  capacity,  such  as  in 
general  councils,  ecclesiastical  assemblies,  synods,  etc.  5) 
Militans  et  triumphmis,  or  the  militant  and  triumphant 
Church,  The  Church  is  a  militant  Church  on  the  earth,  in- 
asmuch as  it  combats  the  devil,  the  world  and  the  flesh.  In 
reality  only  the  true  believers  participate  in  this  struggle, 
and  yet  it  may  also  be  said  that  the  whole  Church  takes 
part  in  the  fight.     The  Church  achieves  many  victories  in 


;j7G  ixci-Ksioi.or.Y. 

this  world  of  strife,  but  only  in  heaven  will  it  become  the 
Church  triumphant  when  the  goal  is  reached  and  the  king- 
dom of  God  is  made  complete,  or  is  perfectly  consummated. 

5.    Status  Ecclesi^. 

Status  ecclesix  are:  1)  status  ecclesiasticus,  or  the  office 
of  the  Ministry  established  by  Christ  to  preach  the  Word 
of  God,  make  application  of  the  power  of  the  keys  and  ad- 
minister the  Sacraments  (See  paragraph  39)  ;  2)  status 
(Economicus  sive  domesticus  is  divided  by  the  old  Dogma- 
tians  into  three  parts:  a)  societas  conjugalis;  b)  societas 
paterna;  c)  societas  herilis.  Hollazius  defines  marriage 
as  follows:'''  "Conjugium  or  marriage  is  in  accordance  with 
the  divine  institution  the  indissoluble  union  of  one  man  and 
one  woman  by  reason  of  the  mutual  consent  of  both  for  the 
begetting  of  offspring  and  mutual  assistance  in  life."  In 
general  the  justifiable  reason  for  divorce  is  represented  as 
being  adultery,  but  some  Dogmaticians  say  that  causae  justse 
divortii  sunt  adulterium  et  malitiosa  desertio.  However, 
this  is  a  moot  question  and  the  most  conservative  position 
is  that  only  adultery  is  a  causa  justa.  With  respect  to  other 
questions  of  marriage  compare  Schmid's  Dogmatics,  para- 
graph 61,  and  also  Church  Polity.  With  regard  to  societas 
paterna  et  herilis  consult  the  same  author  and  textbooks  in 
Catechetics;  3)  status  politicus.  Magistratus  is  considered 
partly  in  the  abstract  or  as  the  government  and  power  per 
se,  and  partly  in  the  concrete,  i.  e.,  those  that  govern.  Causa 
efficiens  priucipalis  is  the  Triune  God,  who  sometimes  di- 
rectly but  generally  indirectly  establishes  the  government. 
Potestas  or  the  power  is  divided  as  follows:  a)  officium 
legislatorium,  b)  judicianum,  c)  punitivum.  Bonum  publi- 
cum, for  which  the  civil  magistrate  has  been  ordained,  is 
said  to  be  fourfold:  a)  eccle^iasticum,  b)  civile,  c)  morale, 
d)  naturale.  The  Christians  are  in  duty  bound  to  obey  the 
government  in  all  things  that  are  not  contrary  to  the  Word 
of  God,  fulfill  all  their  obligations  and  pray  for  those  in 


*  Exam.  Theol.  Acroam.     Pars  IV,  Cap.  iv.  p.  900. 


THE   CHURCH.  377 

authority.  Finis  proximus  is  the  general  good,  while  finis 
iiltimus  is  the  honor  of  God.  Cf.  Schmid's  Dogmatics,  para- 
graph 60. 

6.    The  Aim  and  Purpose  of  the  Church. 

Finis  proximus  is  the  edification  of  the  entire  body 
of  the  Church  as  well  as  of  the  individual  members.  The 
Church  grows  inwardly  as  well  as  externally.  It  must  care 
for  the  material  as  well  as  the  spiritual  welfare  of  its  mem- 
bers, but  especially  the  spiritual  welfare.  The  Church  must 
be  vitally  interested,  not  only  in  home  missions  and  inner 
missions  with  all  their  diverse  activities,  but  also  in  the 
external  development  of  the  local  congregations  as  well  as 
in  the  foreign  mission  of  the  Church  in  its  entirety,  so  that 
in  accordance  with  the  command  of  our  Lord  in  Matt.  28 : 
19,  20,  the  Gospel  may  be  preached  to  all  the  earth.  This 
is  the  great  mission  of  the  Church,  and  even  if  at  times  the 
prospects  of  reaching  the  goal  do  not  seem  so  bright,  still 
the  Church  must  be  obedient  to  the  Lord  and  prosecute  the 
cause  of  missions  with  all  vigor  and  power  until  the  Lord 
shall  come  again  to  complete  the  victory.  Fi}iis  ultimus  is 
the  eternal  salvation  of  the  members  together  with  the 
establishment  of  the  kingdom  of  God  through  which  His 
name  is  glorified  and  the  divine  will  and  purpose  concerning 
the  salvation  of  men  is  accomplished. 

7..    Notes  on  the  History  of  Dogma. 

During  the  earliest  period  there  was  no  real  development 
of  the  doctrine  of  the  Church.  During  the  Apostolic  period 
the  congregations  were  not  united  in  ecclesiastical  groups ; 
many  of  them,  however,  sustained  certain  relationships 
with  each  other.  The  unity  of  the  Church  was  emphasized. 
The  so-called  mother  churches  were  held  in  the  highest  re- 
gard, especially  the  churches  that  had  been  founded  by  the 
Apostles.  When  the  Judaistic  and  Gnostic  tendencies  began 
to  make  their  schismatic  influence  felt,  then  the  congrega- 
tions also  began  to  feel  the  need  of  a  closer  union.  It  was 
considered  to  be  of  the  utmost  importance  to  possess  the 


378  KCCLESIOLOGY. 

same  doctrines  as  the  apostolical  churches.  In  this  way  the 
expression  "apostolicity"  came  into  vogue.  After  the  second 
ecumenical  council  it  became  customary  to  speak  of  one, 
holy,  catholic  and  apostolic  Church.  The  controversy  with 
the  Donatists  and  other  similar  tendencies  gave  rise  to  a 
special  development  of  the  doctrine  of  the  Church.  Their 
position  with  regard  to  the  purity  of  the  Church  was  power- 
fully combatted  by  such  men  as  Optatus  of  Mileve,  Augus- 
tine and  others.  High  Church  tendencies  made  their  ap- 
pearance through  Cyprian,  but  Augustine  was  also  one  of 
the  founders  of  the  Roman  hierarchical  position.  It  became 
more  and  more  common  to  set  forth  the  external  unity  of 
the  Church  to  the  detriment  of  its  true  essence.  The  Roman 
Church  laid  pronounced  emphasis  on  the  external  civil  and 
political  rights  of  the  Church  so  that  it  became  an  externa 
politia,  a  societas  externarum  rerum  ac  rituum.  It  became 
customary  to  pay  little  or  no  heed  to  the  spiritual  character 
of  the  members.  It  was  only  the  external  connection  with 
the  Church  that  was  emphasized,  inasmuch  as  no  salvation 
could  be  found  outside  of  the  Catholic  Church.  In  accord- 
ance with  the  conception  of  the  Church  held  by  the  ultra- 
Protestants  as  it  arose  especially  in  the  Swiss  Reformation, 
the  exact  opposite  view  was  taken,  so  that  personal  faith 
became  all  in  all,  the  Church  was  considered  invisible,  while 
only  true  believers  were  to  belong  to  the  external  organiza- 
tion. The  significance  of  the  means  of  grace  was  disre- 
garded, inasmuch  as  the  Lord  often  dealt  immediately  with 
the  children  of  men.  The  Lutheran  Reformation  took  the 
true  apostolical  position  and  set  forth  a  doctrine  of  the 
Church  that  was  conservative  as  well  as  comprehensive. 
Proper  emphasis  was  laid  both  on  the  inner  essence  and 
the  external  character  of  the  Church.  In  its  true  being  the 
Church  comprises  the  communion  of  saints,  but  the  ex- 
planation was  made  that  the  Church  on  earth  cannot  pos- 
sibly be  composed  of  believers  alone.  The  Church  was  set 
forth  as  an  institution  in  which  the  grace  of  God  was  freely 
dispensed,  while  the  historical  continuity  of  the  Church  was 
stressed  by  pointing  out  that  no  new  Church  was  estab- 


THE  CHURCH.  379 

lished,  but  the  Church  was  the  old  apostolical  and  catholic 
Church  which  had  been  reformed  in  accordance  with  the 
Word  of  God;  hence  it  was  confessedly  one,  holy  com- 
munion, which  shall  continue  forever.  The  different  views 
that  obtained  during  the  period  of  the  Reformation  are 
still  to  be  found  among  the  various  church  denominations. 
The  Catholic  Church  never  changes  as  to  its  doctrinal  posi- 
tions. The  Lutheran  Church  is  faithful  to  its  confessions, 
although,  by  reason  of  the  principle  of  formal  freedom  in 
Church  polity,  divergent  tendencies  have  appeared.  Among 
the  Reformed  groups  we  find  both  high-church  and  low- 
church  tendencies,  but,  generally  speaking,  they  hold  to  the 
original  Reformed  views  in  principle,  although  there  are 
practically  many  differences  owing  to  the  influence  of  cir- 
cumstances at  the  time  of  organization  and  during  the 
period  of  subsequent  development.  We  shall  now  proceed 
to  present  more  detailed  notes  on  the  history  of  this  dogma, 

Clement  of  Rojie  presents  the  Church  as  the  people  of  God  gathered 
together  from  the  whole  earth,  the  true  Israel  which  replaces  the  old. 
Ignatius  makes  use  of  the  expression  catholic  Church  in  the  sense 
that  it  comprises  all  the  congregations  in  the  world  and  that  in  its 
essence  it  is  invisible.  Justin  Martyr  says  that  the  Church  is  a 
priestly  people  but  that  some  of  its  members  are  only  nominal  Chris- 
tians. Indeed  it  was  a  common  opinion  in  those  days  that  the  Church 
consisted  really  of  true  believers,  but  that  many  members  were  Chris- 
tians only  in  name.  Iren.eus  said  that  the  Church  was  the  paradise 
of  salvation  and  that  the  activity  of  the  Holy  Spirit  was  limited  to  the 
Church  so  that  only  the  members  of  the  Church  could  enjoy  its  bene- 
fits. He  set  forth  the  following  phrase:  ubi  ecclesia  ibi  Spiritus  Dei, 
et  ubi  Spiritus  Dei  ibi  ecclesia.  In  choosing  as  between  divergent 
doctrinal  positions  regard  must  be  had  for  the  views  held  in  the 
apostolical  congregations.  Tertullian  calls  the  Church  Noah's  ark. 
He  said  that  God  was  our  Father  and  the  Church  our  mother.  He  also 
laid  stress  on  that  which  was  taught  in  the  apostolical  churches  and 
especially  the  church  in  Rome  as  being  normative  for  all  doctrinal 
development.  When  he  became  a  Montanist  he  spoke  of  two  churches, 
the  one  consisting  of  the  Spirit  and  the  spiritually  minded,  the  other 
is  the  church  of  the  bishops,  the  members  of  which  are  if/vxcKot, 
Clement  of  Alexandria  declared  that  there  was  only  one  catholic 
Church,  since  there  is  but  one  God  and  the  earthly  Church  is  an  image 
of  the  heavenly.  Cyprian  likens  the  Church  to  the  house  of  Rahab 
and  the  seamless  garment  of  Christ.    The  Church  is  one  and  the  Trinity 


380  KCCLESIOLOGY. 

is  the  eternal  image  of  its  unity.  The  external  expression  of  this 
unity  is  the  episcopacy.  The  bishops  are  the  representatives  of  the 
Church.  Although  he  held  that  the  Roman  bishop  was  only  primus 
inter  pares,  still  he  maintained  that  the  cathedra  Petri  constituted  the 
chief  seat  of  the  unity  of  the  Church.  No  one  could  be  saved  that  did 
not  belong  to  the  Church,  and  if  anyone  parted  from  the  bishop  he 
also  separated  himself  from  the  saving  Church.  Ohigex  also  uses  the 
figure  of  the  house  of  Rahab  and  compares  the  Church  to  the  light  of 
the  moon  that  streams  forth  from  Christ  as  the  sun. 

The  Donntists  required  that  all  the  members  of  the  Church  should 
be  true  Christians,  declaring  that  if  the  Church  tolerated  unworthy 
members  it  would  lose  the  qualities  of  holiness  and  purity,  thereby 
nullifying  the  effects  of  its  sacramental  acts.  Optatus  of  Mile\'e  de- 
fended the  doctrine  of  the  Roman  Church  and  set  forth  that  the 
universal  Church  could  not  be  conceived  of  as  limited  to  a  small  section 
of  Africa.  He  also  maintained  that  the  purity  of  the  Church  could 
not  consist  in  the  holiness  of  its  members  and  that  the  efficacy  of  the 
Sacraments  did  not  depend  on  the  character  of  those  that  administered 
them.  Augustine  also  combatted  the  Donatist  heresy,  setting  forth  a 
defense  of  the  state  church.  The  chair  of  Peter  was  the  center  of 
the  Church.  However,  by  the  rock  in  Matt.  16:  18  he  did  not  under- 
stand Peter,  but  Christ,  whom  Peter  confessed.  He  set  forth  the 
great  authority  of  the  Catholic  Church  and  declared  that  he  would 
not  believe  the  Gospel,  provided  the  great  authority  of  the  Church  did 
not  comi)el  him  to  do  so.  Vi.ncext  of  Lerins  presented  the  phrase: 
quod  semper,  quod  ubique,  quod  ab  omnibus  creditum  est.  This  asser- 
tion was  meant  to  constitute  a  gauge  of  the  doctrine  of  the  Catholic 
Church.  Leo  the  Great  and  Gregory  the  Great  were  enthusiastic  de- 
fenders of  the  teaching  that  the  Roman  bishop  was  the  successor  of 
Peter  and  that  consequently  the  unity  of  the  Church  was  dependent 
on  the  union  with  Rome.  The  Catholic  conception  of  the  Church  was 
therefore  fixed  before  the  Scholastic  period,  although  it  was  during 
this  period  that  it  was  developed  more  into  its  logical  sequence. 

Gregory  VII  exerted  a  very  powerful  influence  on  the  polity  of  the 
Roman  Church,  while  Innocent  III  called  the  pope  the  vicar  of  God 
and  Christ,  extending  his  power  and  influence  to  all  the  world.  Thomas 
Aquinas  held  the  same  view  with  regard  to  the  Church  and  the  power 
of  the  papacy.  The  pope,  he  declared,  was  like  a  king  in  his  kingdom 
and  the  defender  of  the  faith.  Bellarmi.x  said  that  the  concept  of  the 
Church  is  comprised  of  three  parts:  professio  verse  fidei,  by  which 
Jews,  heathens,  heretics  and  backsliders  are  excluded;  sacramentorum 
communio,  by  which  catechumeni  et  excommunicati  are  excluded,  and 
finally  regimen  unius  Christi  in  terris  vicarii,  by  which  all  schismatics 
are  excluded.  The  Church  is  just  as  visible  and  palpable  as  the  Roman 
people  or  as  Venice  and  Gaul. 


Tin-:  CHURCH.  381 

The  position  of  Luther  was  presented  in  the  Augsburg  Confession 
and  also  in  his  catechisms.  Calvin  loolied  upon  the  Cliurcli  as  having 
been  founded  by  God.  The  Cliurch  is  our  mother,  whose  mission  it  is 
to  rear  us  in  the  fear  and  admonition  of  tlie  Lord,  i.  e.,  sanctification. 
Not  only  the  means  of  grace,  but  also  church  discipline,  were  reckoned 
as  distinguishing  marks  of  the  Church.  His  doctrine  of  Church  polity 
was  aristocratic  and  in  principle  implied  the  same  as  the  present-day 
Presbyterianism.  The  Lutheran  position  is  set  forth  in  the  Augsburg 
Confession,  Art.  VII  and  VIII,  and  further  developed  in  the  remaining 
symbols.  With  regard  to  the  membership  of  unbelievers  in  the  Church 
the  Apology  says:*  "We  acknowledge  that  hypocrites  and  ungodly 
men  may  in  this  life  be  found  together  with  others  in  the  congregation 
and  that  they  may  be  members  of  the  congregation  in  an  external  way 
and  stand  in  relation  to  the  external  signs  of  the  Church,  namely,  the 
Word,  the  confessions  and  the  sacraments,  especially  if  they  have  not 
been  excommunicated  or  otherwise  excluded  from  the  congregation." 
But  the  Apology  also  stresses  the  fact  that  only  the  believers  are  the 
true  members  who  really  comprise  the  congregation.  However,  the 
unbelievers  are  the  objects  of  the  saving  activity  of  the  Holy  Spirit 
through  the  means  of  grace  and  may  therefore  become  true  members. 
Although  the  Apology  and  the  other  symbols  do  not  deal  at  great 
length  with  the  pedagogical  mission  of  the  Church,  still  there  are  many 
expressions  which  at  least  in  principle  set  forth  the  educational  activity 
and  influence  of  the  Church.  The  old  Dogmaticians  developed  the  doc- 
trine of  the  Church  in  accordance  with  the  Confessions. 

In  recent  times  we  would  in  the  first  place  mention  the  name  of 
Kant,  who  regarded  the  Church  as  an  ethical  communion  only.  The 
position  that  he  took  has  exercised  influence  on  such  theologians  as 
merely  lay  emphasis  on  the  ethical  element  in  Christianity.  The 
Rationalists,  such  as  Wegscheider,  regarded  the  Church  as  an  educa- 
tional institution,  but  some  considered  that  the  Church  was  superfluous. 
The  Suvernaturalists  also  took  a  superficial  view  of  the  Church  and 
merely  considered  it  an  assembly  of  the  confessors  of  the  Christian 
religion.  Hegel  considered  the  State  as  being  self-sufficient,  that  the 
dualism  of  the  Church  and  the  State  was  an  intermediate  state  which 
would  cease  to  be  when  the  State  had  realized  its  ethical  ideas.  For 
this  reason  Strauss  considered  that  the  State  rendered  the  Church 
increasingly  dispensable.  The  mediating  theologians  consider  that 
the  Church  consists  of  such  as  have  entered  into  life-communion  with 
Christ,  but  their  view  of  such  life-communion  is  not  the  Lutheran  view. 
Schleiermacher  rejected  the  distinction  between  the  visible  and  the 
Invisible  Church.  The  Church  is  not  the  assembly  of  all  baptized  and 
regenerated  persons,  rather  it  is  the  combination  of  all  the  activities 
of  the    Spirit   or   of   that   which   has   been   accomplished    through   the 

*  Miiller,  Symb.  Biicher,  p.  152,  3. 


382  fxclksi<)i,o(;y. 

effects  of  redemption  in  the  world.  Among  the  special  characteristics 
of  the  Church  he  counts  the  Word  and  the  ministry  of  the  Word,  which 
corresponds  to  the  prophetic  office  of  Christ,  the  Sacraments,  which 
correspond  to  the  high-priestly  office  of  Christ,  together  with  the  power 
of  the  keys  and  prayer,  through  which  the  regal  office  of  Christ  is 
represented.  In  more  recent  times  some  theologians  have  presented 
the  symbolic  and  old  dogmatic  conception  of  the  Church,  others  have 
made  departures  to  the  right  and  to  the  left.  Stahl  defends  the 
Episcopal  system.  He  distinguishes  between  the  terms  congregation 
and  Church.  The  congregation  is  the  more  temporary  activity  at  a 
particular  place,  but  the  Church  exists  at  all  times.  The  congregation 
represents  the  activity  of  men  as  directed  toward  God;  the  Church 
comprises  the  divine  activity  in  relation  to  men.  Vilmab  presents 
the  Church  as  an  objective  institution.  He  says  that  the  Church  pos- 
sesses great  significance  in  carrying  on  its  work  through  the  means 
of  grace,  and  also  serves  as  a  protector  in  preserving  these  same  means 
of  grace.  LiiuK  declared  that  the  Lutheran  Church  was  the  queen 
among  the  churches  on  earth.  This  is  true  with  reference  to  the 
doctrine.  With  regard  to  the  concept  of  the  Church  and  other  related 
matters  Löhe  represents  the  "right"  or  the  conservative  element. 
MiixciiMEYER  sets  forth  the  Church  as  the  visible  assembly  of  the 
baptized.  Delitzsch  holds  a  similar  position.  Kliefoth  makes  a  dis- 
tinction between  the  Church  and  the  congregation,  declaring  that  the 
latter  is  only  a  part  of  the  Church.  The  Triune  God  is  the  living 
foundation  of  the  Church,  but  the  Triune  God  is  also  in  the  Church. 
The  Jerusalem  that  is  above  together  with  the  company  of  believers 
constitute  the  Church.  The  Church  is  a  divine  institution  whose 
mission  is  to  mediate  the  application  of  redemption.  It  is  a  living 
organism  which  consists  of  institutions,  callings,  offices  and  states  of 
society.  It  is  an  institution  for  the  salvation  of  men  by  means  of 
which  God  gathers  unto  Himself  a  congregation  of  men.  The  assembly 
of  God  is  a  coetus  vocatorum  and  is  visible.  Inasmuch  as  the  Church 
contains  within  itself  this  coetus  vocatorum,  therefore  it  is  not  merely 
an  assembly  of  believers.  The  believers  comprise  the  communion  of 
saints.  Kliefoth  had  prominent  adherents  in  Sweden,  among  whom 
may  be  mentioned  E.  G.  Bring,  W.  Flensburg  and  A.  N.  Sundberg. 
The  instruction  at  the  university  of  Lund  reflected  the  views  of 
Kliefoth.  The  conception  of  the  Church  as  invisible  was  more  or  less 
rejected  and  the  visible  Church  emphasized.  While  in  Germany  the 
Sacraments  were  placed  above  the  Word,  the  Swedish  adherents  of 
Kliefoth  paid  no  special  attention  to  the  question  of  superiority  of  the 
different  means  of  grace,  but  they  stressed  the  importance  of  holding 
the  view  that  the  Church  had  its  fundamental  origin  in  the  grace  of 
God  and  the  Means  of  Grace  and  not  in  the  membership  as  the  spiritual 
priesthood.      '!"he    Personal    Idealism    of    Bcström    and    the    religious 


THE   CHURCH.  383 

idealistic  views  of  Wikner  exercised  great  influence  at  the  university 
of  Uppsala  and  throughout  the  Northern  countries,  but  the  Bostromian 
philosophy  has  not  dominated  Theology  and  doctrinal  views  as  did 
Hegelianism  in  Germany.  The  Ritschlian  theology  has  been  counter- 
acted by  the  Bostromian  philosophy,  because  the  disciples  of  Boström 
and  Wikner  could  not  be  attracted  by  the  Ritschlian  standpoint  as 
to  Metaphysics.  Among  the  theologians  at  Uppsala  W.  Rudin  was 
influenced  by  the  views  of  J.  T.  Beck.  Rudin  was  a  mystic  in  the  bsst 
sense,  and  his  views  in  regard  to  the  Church,  though  inclining  to  low- 
church  tendencies,  were  not  unchurchly.  At  the  university  of  Chris- 
tiania  Gisle  Johnson  wielded  an  unequalled  influence  on  the  Church 
of  Norway  and  gave  the  Pietistic  movement  inaugurated  by  Hauge  a 
churchly  direction.  Kiekkegaard  in  Denmark  represented  religious 
individualism,  just  as  Vinet  in  Switzerland  argued  for  churchly  in- 
dividualism. Kierkegaard  became  a  strong  opponent  to  Hegelianism 
and  theoretical  presentation  of  doctrine.  The  ethical  side  of  Chris- 
tianity appealed  to  him.  He  was  opposed  to  the  Church  as  an  institu- 
tion and  what  he  called  official  Christianity.  He  describes  infant 
baptism,  confirmation  and  the  marriage  ritual  with  biting  irony  and 
takes  no  interest  in  common  divine  service  for  edification.  He  seems 
to  have  no  clear  idea  of  the  meaning  of  church  life.  To  him  the  Church 
belonged  to  the  future,  when  the  individuals,  after  their  individual 
experiences  and  sufferings  here,  come  together  as  a  society  in  heaven. 
Grundtvig  arrived  at  his  standpoint  concerning  the  ideal  of  the  Church 
during  his  contentions  with  the  Rationalists.  He  says  that  Orthodoxy 
looked  upon  the  Scriptures  as  the  foundation  of  the  Church,  but  when 
orthodox  theology  interpreted  the  Bible  according  to  subjective  opinions, 
it  was  necessary  to  find  a  more  firm  ground.  And  this  firmer  founda- 
tion he  found  in  the  Sacrament  of  Baptism  and  in  the  Apostolical  Con- 
fession of  faith.  He  strangely  held  that  the  Apostles'  Creed  is  the 
Word  from  the  mouth  of  Jesus  Himself,  and  that  this  Word  is  the 
living  Word  and  above  that  of  the  Bible.  Grundtvig's  ideal  of  the 
Church  was  a  free  development  of  all  the  religious  forces  within  the 
Church  on  the  foundation  of  authority.  He  sought  to  satisfy  Pietistic 
tendencies  and  at  the  same  time  Roman  Catholic  ideas  by  his  doctrine 
of  tradition  and  the  living  Word.  On  account  of  vacillation  between 
two  opposite  tendencies  he  failed  in  attaining  his  ideal.  In  general, 
the  leading  Lutheran  theologians  support  the  ordinary  Lutheran  view. 
This  is  also  the  case  in  the  United  States,  although  the  Missouri  Synod 
in  its  concept  of  the  Church,  particularly  in  regard  to  Church  polity, 
takes  a  position  which  most  closely  resembles  that  of  the  congrega- 
tional and  coUegiate  system. 


384  i:crLKsioi.ot.v. 


§33.     THE  MEANS  OF  GRACE  IN  GENERAL. 

The  Church  stands  in  need  of  the  means  of  grace  for  the 
purpose  of  carrying  on  its  work.  The  Lord  has  also  given 
the  Church  such  means.  These  means  are  the  Word  and 
the  holy  Sacraments,  through  which  the  Holy  Spirit  pre- 
sents and  applies  the  salvation  that  is  in  Christ.  These 
means  comprise  both  word  and  deed.  The  Word  may  be 
said  to  partake  of  the  nature  of  deed  in  a  certain  sense,  but 
the  Sacraments  are  such  in  a  very  special  sense.  They  con- 
stitute the  visible  bearers  and  means  of  the  grace  of  God. 

1.    The  Necessity  of  the  Means  of  Grace. 

Generally  speaking,  the  Reformed  denominations,  in  com- 
mon with  all  religious  visionaries,  take  the  position  that 
God  through  His  grace  deals  directly  with  the  children  of 
men,  at  least  as  often  directly  as  mediately,  through  the 
means  of  grace.  On  the  other  hand,  the  Lutheran  Church 
emphasizes  the  necessity  of  the  means  of  grace.  Of  course 
our  Church  does  not  take  the  position  that  God  is  thereby 
absolutely  bound,  but  so  far  as  we  know  God  works  solely 
through  the  means  of  grace,  so  that  justifying  faith  is 
wrought  through  these  means  and  man  could  not  be  saved 
without  them.  They  constitute  the  necessary  means  for 
the  salvation  of  man,  the  means  by  which  God  enters  into 
relation  with  man  and  man  with  God.  In  the  Schmalkald 
articles  we  read:*  "And  in  those  things  which  concern  the 
spoken,  outward  Word,  we  must  finally  hold  that  God  grants 
His  Spirit  or  grace  to  no  one,  except  through  or  with  the 
preceding  outward  Word.  Thereby  we  are  protected  against 
enthusiasts,  i.  e.,  spirits  who  boast  that  they  have  the  Spirit 
without  and  before  the  Word.  —  Therefore  in  regard  to 
this  we  ought  and  must  constantly  maintain  that  God  does 
not  wish  to  deal  with  us  otherwise  than  through  the  spoken 
Word  and  the  sacraments,"  etc. 

*  Miiller.  Svmb.  Biicher,  p.  321,  3. 


THE    JIEAXS    OF   GKACE    IX   GENEUAL.  385 

2.    God's  Relation  to  the  Means  of  Grace. 

Although  God  in  His  spiritual  activity  is  not  absolutely 
bound  by  the  means  of  grace  or  any  other  external  means, 
still  He  has  Himself  instituted  these  means  through  which 
He  works  in  the  kingdom  of  grace,  just  as  He  has  estab- 
lished the  laws  of  nature  through  which  as  a  rule  He  reigns 
in  the  kingdom  of  nature.  The  fifth  article  of  the  Augsburg 
Confession  says  of  the  relationship  of  God  to  the  means  of 
grace:  "The  Holy  Ghost,  who  works  faith  wherever  and 
whenever  it  pleases  God,  is  given  through  the  Word  and 
the  Sacraments  as  through  instruments  and  means."  The 
words  in  this  quotation :  *'ubi  et  quando  visum  est  Deo," 
might  be  misunderstood,  hence  this  explanation :  they  do  not 
imply  that  God  has  withdrawn  from  His  creation,  as  the 
Deists  teach  concerning  God's  relation  to  the  laws  of  nature, 
nor  that  God  only  occasionally  works  through  the  means  of 
grace  as  it  pleases  Him,  rather  God  works  in  a  free  and 
personal  way  through  the  means  of  grace  and  is  present  in 
them  in  accordance  with  His  promise.  God  desires  to  work 
in  this  manner  and  deals  with  the  world  and  the  children 
of  men  in  accordance  with  His  will,  but  not  arbitrarily.  It 
certainly  was  necessary  for  God  in  some  manner  to  carry 
out  His  council  and  purpose  of  salvation  both  objectively,  as 
through  Christ,  and  by  application,  as  through  the  Holy 
Ghost.  In  His  eternal  wisdom  God  determined  upon  the 
best  way.  The  fact  that  God  in  His  wisdom  followed  His 
own  plan  does  not  imply  predestination  in  accordance  with 
the  Calvinistic  view.  If  faith  is  brought  about  quando 
visum  est  Deo,  this  does  not  signify  that  God  makes  a  choice 
of  persons  in  whom  to  work  while  passing  others  by,  since 
it  is  His  will  and  purpose  to  work  faith  in  the  hearts  of  all 
that  use  the  means  of  grace.  If  faith  is  not  thus  effected, 
then  the  responsibility  rests  with  man  himself.  However, 
the  expression  would  indicate  that  it  is  by  His  gracious 
good  will  that  God  works  through  the  means  of  grace.  Man 
has  no  right  to  make  demands  upon  God,  but  he  may  rely 
absolutely  upon  the  assurance  of  God  that  He  will  keep  all 


386  ixcLi;sioi,0(iV. 

His  promises.  The  Lutheran  doctrine  of  the  means  of  grace 
is  therefore  a  great  and  glorious  treasure,  a  treasure  meant 
for  use  and  not  to  be  hidden  away.  Inasmuch  as  the  Cath- 
olic as  well  as  the  Reformed  Churches  do  not  possess  this 
doctrine  of  the  means  of  grace,  therefore  in  their  practical 
work  they  make  use  of  all  manner  of  human  and  earthly 
means  to  effect  what  God  would  bring  about  through  the 
means  of  grace.  But  this  is  the  mere  work  of  man  and 
strange  fire  on  the  altar  of  the  Lord. 

3.    The  Effect  of  the  Means  of  Grace  in  General. 

With  regard  to  the  effect  of  the  means  of  grace  the  Augs- 
burg Confession  says  in  art.  V:  "Per  verbum  et  sacramenta 
tamquam  per  instrumenta  donatur  Spiritus  sanctus."  Thus 
the  means  of  grace  not  only  declare  the  grace  of  God,  they 
are  also  the  bearers  and  means  for  its  inspiration.  It  is 
said  that  the  Spirit  is  given  because  He  applies  the  grace  of 
God.  As  an  effect  of  the  means  of  grace  faith  is  especially 
mentioned  because  of  its  relation  to  justification.  The 
means  of  grace  are  therefore  objective  and  do  not  become 
means  of  grace  through  the  faith  of  man.  However,  they 
do  not  work  ex  opere  operato.  The  benefits  of  the  means 
of  grace  are  dependent  on  the  subjective  state  of  man ;  they 
do  not  operate  mechanically  and  in  a  deterministic  manner. 
The  means  of  grace  are  presented  to  man  and  through  them 
the  Holy  Ghost  would  bring  about  a  receptive  or  passive 
attitude  which  afterwards  becomes  active,  when  man  be- 
comes a  true  believer.  However,  the  believer  stands  in  need 
of  the  means  of  grace  increasingly  throughout  the  period 
of  sanctification.  Holy  Baptism  always  remains  a  basis  for 
the  new  life  in  Christ,  while  the  Word  of  God  together  with 
the  Sacrament  of  the  Lord's  Supper  furnish  the  spiritual 
food  on  the  journey  toward  the  final  goal. 


IXSPIKATIOX    AND   AtTTIIORITY   OF   SCRH'TUKE.  387 

§34.    THE  INSPIRATION  AND  AUTHORITY  OF  HOLY 

SCRIPTURE. 

Inasmuch  as  the  Holy  Scriptures  are  a  means  of  grace,  it 
is  important  that  every  thinking  Christian  should  be  as- 
sured concerning  the  complete  inspiration  of  the  Bible,  that 
it  is  indeed  the  Word  of  God,  not  only  that  it  contains  the 
Word  of  God  or  divine  thoughts.  It  does  not  lie  within  the 
province  of  Dogmatics  to  set  forth  the  proofs  of  the  inspira- 
tion of  the  Bible,  and  possibly  it  would  be  more  proper  to 
treat  of  the  doctrine  of  the  inspiration  and  authority  of  the 
Scriptures  in  the  prolegomena  to  Dogmatics.  For  this  rea- 
son we  merely  enumerate  the  ordinary  proofs,  which  are 
the  following: 

The  testimony  of  the  books  of  the  Old  and  New  Testa- 
ment themselves  with  regard  to  their  inspiration;  the  con- 
tent of  the  books  of  the  Bible,  the  good  character  and  trust- 
worthiness of  the  writers;  the  miracles;  the  fulfillment  of 
the  prophecies ;  the  effects  of  Christianity  and  the  internal 
testimony  of  the  Holy  Spirit.  These  proofs  are  variously 
classified.  The  old  Dogmaticians  divide  them  into  internal 
and  external  proofs.  Others  divide  them  into  Biblical,  his- 
torical and  critical  proofs,  but  all  acknowledge  that  the  in- 
ternal testimony  of  the  Holy  Ghost  is  the  best  proof.  The 
early  Protestants  and  the  old  Dogmaticians  presented  testi- 
monium Spiritus  Sancti  internum  in  a  more  limited  sense 
than  is  now  usual.  They  held  that  the  same  Spirit  who 
inspired  the  Biblical  authors  also  testifies  to  the  believers 
that  the  Scriptures  are  the  Word  of  God.  The  unregenerate 
do  not  receive  such  witness  and  do  not  come  to  such  a  con- 
viction, at  least  not  so  convincing.  In  later  and  recent 
times  the  evidence  of  Christian  experience  has  been  fully 
developed  in  Apologetics.  The  proofs  supplied  by  Christian 
experience  are  the  best  arguments  for  the  inspiration  of 
the  Bible.  The  other  proofs  may  serve  as  guides.  The  most 
convincing  proofs  for  the  majority  are  the  fulfillment  of 
prophecy  and  the  efifects  of  Christianity. 


388  ECCLESIOLOGY. 

1.    The  Definition  of  Inspiration. 

The  expression  inspiratio  arose  from  the  Vulgate  trans- 
lation of  ypii<f>^]  öeoVrtDOTo?  by  scriptura  inspirata.  Compare 
2  Tim.  3:  16.  Inspiration  may  be  defined  as  follows: 
Inspiratio  ivas  the  dynamic  influence  of  the  Holy  Ghost  on 
the  waiters  of  the  Scriptures  through  ichich  their  receptivity 
2uas  enabled  to  understand  correctly  the  truth  and  their 
spontaneity  to  7'ender  adequately,  in  a  real  and  verbal  sense, 
the  revealed  and  historical  truth.  There  is  no  perfect  anal- 
ogy with  which  to  compare  inspiration,  neither  are  we  able 
in  a  completely  satisfactory  manner  to  comprehend  the 
modus  of  inspiration.  An  imperfect  analogy  may  be  found 
in  the  general  influence  of  the  Holy  Spirit  on  the  believers 
in  the  enlightenment  that  is  imparted  to  them  in  their 
Christian  life.  However,  as  stated,  the  analogy  is  not  per- 
fect, for  we  must  bear  in  mind  that  the  inspiration  of  the 
writers  was  perfect,  so  that  the  material  content  of  faith 
was  set  forth  both  as  to  content  and  form  in  a  faultless  and 
perfect  manner.  Inspiration  was  effected  directly  through 
the  creative  activity  of  the  Holy  Spirit,  while  the  enlighten- 
ment of  the  believers  is  mediated  through  the  influence  of 
the  Word  of  God.  In  reality  inspiration  was  a  miracle  and 
therefore  supernatural.  However,  it  is  possible  to  think  of 
a  state  in  which  the  Holy  Spirit  dwelling  dynamically  in 
the  heart  of  man  co-operates  with  him  without  creating  a 
state  of  ecstasy,  the  resultant  activity  being  supernatural 
and  natural  at  the  same  time.  In  this  manner  the  mechani- 
cal conception  of  inspiration  is  avoided.  The  old  Dogma- 
ticians,  who  held  to  the  mechanical  theory  of  inspiration, 
were  indeed  on  the  right  path  to  a  proper  conception  of 
inspiration.  Their  mistake  lay  in  over-emphasizing  the 
divine  influence  with  a  corresponding  repression  of  the 
human  element,  which  resulted  in  a  sort  of  monophysitism. 
A  reaction  followed,  others  going  to  the  opposite  extreme, 
imperiling  and  undermining  faith  in  the  Word  of  God.  It 
is  necessary  to  emphasize  both  the  divine  and  the  human 
factors  in  inspiration,  yet,  as  between  the  two  one-sided 


INSl'IIiATIOX    A.ND   AUTIIOIUTY   OV   SCUII'Tt'KE.  '     389 

views,  it  is  better  to  lay  stress  on  the  divine,  at  the  expense 
of  the  human  factor.  In  every  case  God  is  the  auctor 
primarius.  The  orthodox  dynamic  theory  holds  the  true 
middle  ground,  in  the  first  place  setting  forth  the  divine  ac- 
tivity but  also  placing  proper  emphasis  on  the  human  side. 
Causa  ejflciens  principalis  is  the  Triune  God.  Compare  2 
Tim.  3:16:  "Every  scripture  inspired  of  God" ;  with  regard 
to  the  Father,  compare  Heb.  1:1;  the  Son,  John  1 :  18 ;  the 
Holy  Spirit,  1  Peter  1:11:  "The  Spirit  of  Christ  which  was 
in  them  did  point  unto" ;  2  Peter  1 :  21 :  "Being  moved  by 
the  Holy  Ghost."  Causa  instrumentalis  were  the  holy  men 
of  God.  Compare  2  Peter  1.  21.  God  being  the  auctor 
primarius,  we  may  say  that  inspiration  comprises  two  ele- 
ments, one  a  negative  element,  whereby  God  preserved  the 
writers  from  falsity  and  error,  the  other  a  positive  element, 
whereby  the  writers  were  inspired  with  the  true  message 
both  as  to  content  and  words.  Inasmuch  as  men  were  both 
causa  instrumentalis  and  authors  in  a  secondary  sense,  we 
understand  why  linguistic  imperfections  crept  into  their 
writings. 

The  human  individuality  was  not  suppressed  in  the  act 
of  inspiration.  It  was  a  condescension  on  the  part  of  the 
Holy  Spirit  to  the  character  of  the  human  instrumentality, 
so  that  it  may  be  said  that  the  act  of  inspiration  was  a 
divine-human  act.  The  holy  writers  were  not  merely  me- 
chanical instruments,  such  as  pens  or  amanuenses,  rather 
there  was  an  auto-activity  analogous  to  the  new  life  that 
succeeds  the  new  birth  when  the  regenerated  soul  co- 
operates with  the  Holy  Ghost.  The  human  life  of  the  Son 
of  God  may  also  be  taken  as  an  analogy  of  the  divine-human 
character  of  the  written  Word.  We  acquire  a  false  impres- 
sion of  the  personal  Word  in  overemphasizing  either  His 
divine  or  His  human  nature.  The  same  holds  true  with 
regard  to  the  Scriptures  or  the  written  Word,  which  is  a 
divine-human  Word.  It  is  hardly  necessary  to  point  out 
the  human  element  in  the  Word  of  God,  but  by  way  of  ex- 
ample we  may  mention  that  Luke  (1 :  1 — 4)  speaks  of  hav- 
ing made  thorough  investigations,  from  which  the  conclu- 


390  IXCI.K.SIOl.OGY. 

sion  is  drawn  that  if  inspiration  had  been  mechanical  and 
the  Holy  Spirit  had  dictated  the  contents  of  the  Gospel  of 
Luke,  he  could  have  remained  passive  and  received  the 
message  without  any  investigation.  For  further  study, 
compare  1  Cor.  1:  16;  2  Cor.  12:  2,  etc.  We  know  of  the 
human  peculiarities  in  the  Scriptures.  The  language  is  not 
always  perfect  and  seldom  reaches  the  classical  standard. 
If  the  Holy  Spirit  had  employed  the  writers  as  mechanical 
instruments,  the  Scriptures  would  have  been  faultless 
judged  from  the  most  critical  standpoint.  However,  in 
spite  of  its  human  form,  the  divine  content  is  everywhere 
apparent  and  in  many  instances  in  such  an  overpowering 
manner  that  it  can  easily  be  discerned  how  insufficient  are 
these  earthly  means  to  convey  the  heights  and  the  depths 
of  the  heavenly  content. 

The  Pantheistic  theologians,  of  course,  set  forth  their 
usual  objections.  They  argue  the  absolute  opposition  be- 
tween the  infinite  and  the  finite  and  therefore  the  dictum: 
finitum  non  est  capax  infiniti.  But  they  raise  the  same 
objection  against  the  whole  system  of  Christianity.  How- 
ever, Christianity  is  a  fact.  The  divine-human  character 
of  Jesus  Christ  has  been  proven  in  a  most  satisfactory  way 
by  thinkers  as  great  as  or  greater  than  the  Pantheistic 
philosophers  and  theologians.  If  the  great  miracle  could 
happen  that  the  Son  of  God  could  assume  human  nature, 
then  it  was  also  possible  for  the  Holy  Spirit  to  dwell  in  the 
hearts  of  men  and  influence  them  in  an  extraordinary  man- 
ner, inspiring  them  dynamically  to  put  in  writing  the  con- 
tent of  divine  truth. 

The  question  has  arisen  as  to  whether  the  inspirational 
state  was  momentary  or  permanent.  Some  of  the  old  Dog- 
maticians  said  that  it  was  non  habitus  permanens,  sed  actus 
transiens.  This  is  certainly  true  of  the  production  of  a  spe- 
cially inspired  word,  whether  in  speech  or  written  form. 
But,  generally  speaking,  we  must  consider  the  holy  writers 
to  have  been  in  an  inspired  state.  Inspiration  indeed  con- 
sisted in  a  special  act  in  every  specific  instance,  and  yet  it 
was  a  vital  factor  in  the  life  and  activity  of  the  writers 


IXSPIKATION    AAU   AUTHORITY   OF   SCRIPTURE.  391 

and  not  an  isolated  occurrence.  As  to  the  Apostles  it  would 
hardly  be  proper  to  assert  that  their  writings  alone  were 
inspired,  although  we  would  not  thereby  declare  that  all 
that  they  said  was  inspired;  it  is  sufficient  for  us  to  know 
that  the  canonical  writings  are  inspired.  Paul  made  no 
distinction  between  his  epistles  and  the  spoken  word  which 
he  preached.  Compare  2  Thess.  2 :  15  :  "Stand  fast,  and  hold 
the  traditions  which  ye  were  taught,  whether  by  word,  or 
by  epistle  of  ours."  Cf.  Gal.  1:  6—12;  John  20:  30,  31; 
1  John  1 :  3,  4 ;  2 :  7 ;  2  John  5,  6. 

We  should  carefully  distinguish  between  revelation  and 
inspiration.  All  the  canonical  books  of  the  Bible  are  in- 
spired in  a  plenary  sense,  but  there  are  parts  of  the  Bible 
which  are  not  revealed,  such  as  historical  facts.  But  in  case 
an  event,  a  happening,  circumstances  of  personal  life  and 
civil  conditions  are  known  to  the  author,  it  does  not  pre- 
clude that  the  Holy  Spirit  may  guide  a  writer  in  correct  and 
apt  description,  in  selection  of  the  best  material  and  in 
quotations.  Daniel  quoted  from  the  narratives  of  Nebu- 
chadnezzar and  had  access  to  the  royal  archives,  but  all 
the  statements  of  Daniel  were  inspired,  because  the  Holy 
Spirit  influenced  him  in  true  selection,  in  correct  rendering 
and  in  guarding  him  that  no  mistakes  in  narration  were 
made.  The  Spirit  coworked  with  him  and  all  the  Biblical 
writers  in  their  thinking,  in  the  elaboration  of  the  thoughts 
and  their  verbal  expression,  but  there  was  no  dictation  in 
inspiration,  no  teaching  of  language  in  expression  and  no 
interference  with  the  individual  characteristics.  We  have 
referred  to  the  investigation  of  Luke.  It  is  interesting  to 
notice  his  fine  classical  Greek  in  the  opening  verses  of 
his  Gospel  and  how  he  continues  his  narrative  in  the  com- 
mon dialect.  The  fact  that  he  was  a  learned  man,  and  that 
he  carefully  weighed  the  testimony,  adds  to  the  authority 
of  his  narrative.  In  writing  to  Theophilus  he  says :  "It 
seemed  good  to  me  also,  having  traced  the  course  of  all 
things  accurately  from  the  first,  to  write  to  thee  in  order, 
most  excellent  Theophilus;  that  thou  mightest  know  the 
certainty    concerning   the   things    wherein   thou    wast    in- 


392 


KCCI.KSIOI.Or.Y. 


structed."  But  the  modern  critics,  not  those  who  lived  in 
the  Apostolic  and  Apologetic  periods,  have  attacked  the 
historicity  of  the  Gospel  of  Luke.  Their  criticism  concern? 
Luke  2:  1 — 7.  One  German  critic  calls  verses  1 — 3  "das 
Lukas-legende,"  holding  that  Augustus  never  issued  a  decree 
ordering  a  census,  and  when  a  casual  census  was  held,  the 
presence  of  the  wife  was  not  required.  The  critics  have 
claimed  that  Luke  stood  alone,  unsupported  by  ancient 
authorities.  But  the  statement  by  Luke  has  been  confirmed 
by  the  most  recent  discoveries.  The  rubbish  heaps  of  Egypt 
and  also  the  excavations  in  Asia  Minor  cause  the  stones  to 
cry  aloud  in  support  of  the  narrative  of  Luke.  Ramsay* 
in  his  archeological  research  has  amply  and  clearly  vindi- 
cated the  historicity  of  Luke  and  his  veracity.  By  the  in- 
vestigation of  Ramsay  and  others  it  has  been  proved  that 
there  was  a  periodical  census  system  in  the  Roman  empire. 
It  has  been  shown  that  there  were  two  enrollments,  just 
as  Luke  holds.  In  Luke  2 :  2  the  first  enrollment  is  men- 
tioned, and  in  Acts  5 :  37  Luke  speaks  of  the  great  census 
A.  D.  6  or  7,  when  Judea  had  just  been  incorporated  as  part 
of  the  Roman  province  of  Syria.  If  the  first  census  began 
8 — 7  B.  C.,  according  to  Ramsay,  it  was  slow  in  material- 
izing on  account  of  the  situation  in  Syria  and  Palestine. 
The  new  discoveries  in  regard  to  the  Augustan  cycle  of 
census  places  the  execution  of  the  enrollment  in  6 — 5  B.  C.. 
the  probable  time  of  Christ's  birth.  Ramsay  has  also  un- 
ravelled the  problem  of  Quirinius.  A  series  of  inscriptions 
bearing  on  the  career  of  Quirinius  proves  that  he  was  gov- 
ernor of  Syria  in  the  first  census  and  governor  and  proc- 
urator in  the  second.  The  modern  findings  in  stones  and 
papyri  vindicate  the  accurateness  of  the  Gospel  of  Luke. 
In  regard  to  the  question  of  Revelation  and  Inspiration  the 
facts  mentioned  in  regard  to  Luke  as  a  truthful  historian 
prove  that  Luke  received  no  revelation  in  regard  to  circum- 
stances surrounding  the  two  enrollments,  but  as  an  inspired 
writer  he  was  dynamically  influenced  by  the  Spirit  in  giving 
a  correct  record  both  as  to  suggestio  rerum  and  verborum. 

♦  Bearing  of  Recent  Discovery.    Also:  Was  Christ  Born  at  Bethlehem? 


IXSl'IliATJOX    AXl)   AX'TIIOUITY   OF    KCUlPrTKE.  393 

When  there  is  both  revelation  and  inspiration,  the  narra- 
tive is  not  more  true,  but  becomes  more  convincing  to  our 
feeling  as  inspired  re\'elation.  Read,  for  instance,  Luke  1 : 
26 — 37.  Compare  also  1  Cor.  7  :  10  and  40.  Both  utterances 
are  the  Word  of  God.  The  whole  content  of  the  Bible  is 
the  Word  of  God  as  inspired.  If,  for  instance,  the  narra- 
tive relates  M^hat  Satan  said,  the  satanic  v^ords  are  in  them- 
selves not  God's  w^ord,  but  the  w^hole  statement  is  the  Word 
of  God  verbally  as  truthfully  recorded  by  the  concurrence 
of  the  Holy  Spirit.  Different  parts  of  the  Bible  may  be 
more  or  less  interesting  to  different  readers,  but  all  are  the 
Word  of  God.  There  may  be  parts  of  which  we  do  not  under- 
stand why  they  were  inserted,  but  we  can  be  assured  that 
they  have  had  some  purpose  or  will  be  of  the  greatest  im- 
portance. Seeming  contradictions  disappear  by  better  un- 
derstanding, and  dark  prophecies  by  intense  studies,  and 
if  not,  by  plain  fulfillment.  There  are  many  doctrines  in  the 
Bible  which  evidently  are  revelations,  such  as  the  creation, 
the  propagation  of  sin  from  Adam,  the  vicarious  atonement, 
the  import  of  Baptism,  the  doctrine  of  the  Lord's  Supper, 
regeneration,  the  second  advent,  the  resurrection,  and  so 
forth.  It  is  self-evident  that  God  would  not  reveal  a  fact 
and  do  nothing  towards  inspiring  an  accurate  record  of  its 
content  or  import.  And  as  many  doctrines  depend  as  to 
their  meaning  upon  the  words  used,  the  verbal  inspiration 
is  necessary.  A  revelation  would  not  be  an  apocalypse,  but 
an  apocrypha,  if  nothing  were  revealed,  and  there  cannot  be 
a  revelation  without  words.  If  man  did  not  think  in  words, 
there  would  be  no  thought,  but  chaos.  When  God  revealed, 
it  is  stated  that  He  spoke.  ''God,  having  of  old  time  spoken 
unto  the  fathers  in  the  prophets  by  divers  portions  and  in 
divers  manners,  hath  at  the  end  of  these  days  spoken  unto 
us  in  his  Son."  When  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ  delivered  His 
last  discourses,  it  was  to  a  great  extent  a  revelation.  But 
when  John  recorded  the  wonderful  sayings  in  the  latter 
part  of  the  first  century,  inspiration  was  necessary  and 
also  the  fulfillment  of  the  promise  in  14 :  26,  where  the  Lord 
refers  to  the  coming  of  the  Comforter  and  says :  "He  shall 


394  IXCl.KSIOLOCiY. 

teach  you  all  things  and  bring  to  your  remembrance  all  that 
I  said  unto  you."  Inspiration  and  revelation  are  alike  in 
the  superhuman  influence,  but  revelation  discloses  new 
truth,  and  in  this  instance  we  have  a  superhuman  reminder 
of  what  Christ  said  many  decenniums  before.  There  is  no 
book  like  the  Book  of  books,  the  Word  of  God,  or  the  Bible, 
with  its  revelations  and  plenary  inspiration. 

2.  The  Constituent  Parts  of  Inspiration. 
The  constituent  parts  of  inspiration  are:  1)  Adspiratio 
or  impulsics  ad  scribendum,  i.  e.,  an  admonition  to  write, 
which  occurred  partly  through  external  command  and  part- 
ly through  an  internal  impulse.  Compare  Ex.  17 :  14 ;  Deut. 
31:  19;  Isa.  8:1;  Jer.  36:  2;  Hab.  2:2;  Matt.  28:  19;  2 
Tim.  3:  16;  2  Peter  1:  21;  Rev.  1:  11,  etc.  The  Catholics 
deny  that  there  was  any  such  divine  command  and  teach 
that  the  holy  writers  wrote  by  chance  as  they  happened  to 
be  influenced  or  urged  by  necessity  or  some  accidental  ex- 
ternal circumstances,  Gerhard  remarks  that  these  external 
circumstances  do  not  nullify  the  special  command  of  God, 
rather  they  strengthen  the  admonition  and  the  urging,  2) 
Suggestio  reriim,  or  material  inspiration.  This  includes 
everything  and  not  simply  the  principal  things,  HOLLAZius 
says  in  this  connection  that  the  Scriptures  contain  historical, 
chronological,  genealogical,  astronomical,  natural-historical 
and  political  matters  which  are  revealed  by  God  because 
an  acquaintance  with  them  assists  not  a  little  in  the  inter- 
pretation of  the  Holy  Scriptures  and  in  illustrating  the 
doctrines  and  moral  precepts.  If  only  the  mysteries  of  the 
faith  were  inspired,  then  not  all  of  the  Scripture  would  be 
inspired.  But  Paul  declares  that  the  whole  of  Scripture 
is  divinely  inspired.  The  negative  criticism,  whether  cul- 
tured or  uncultured,  of  course,  enters  many  objections, 
some  of  them  apparently  valid,  to  the  doctrine  that  the 
whole  of  Scripture  is  inspired.  We  must  remember,  how- 
ever, that  that  which  does  not  seem  to  be  of  moment  for 
a  certain  period  or  for  certain  nations  has  possessed  pe- 
culiar significance  for  other  periods  and  for  other  peoples 


INSPIRATION   AND  AUTHORITY  OF   SCRIPTURE.  395 

and  may  come  to  possess  great  significance  for  the  future. 
The  Bible  was  not  written  for  our  time  only,  but  for  all 
time,  and  not  for  the  educated  alone,  but  for  the  uneducated 
as  well.  Of  course,  the  holy  writers  do  not  use  the  language 
of  science,  but  that  of  the  common  people.  When  we  realize 
that  science  is  continually  undergoing  development,  that  it 
makes  assertions  to-day  which  are  retracted  or  controverted 
to-morrow,  that  therefore  it  is  not  exact,  certainly  it  would 
have  been  a  great  misfortune  if  the  writers  of  the  Bible 
had  made  use  of  scientific  language  and  terms.  The  all- 
wise  God  directed  the  writers  and  inspired  them  in  an  in- 
telligent way  so  that  they  used  a  common  language  suitable 
for  all  times  and  all  people.  Science  often  has  had  to  yield 
to  the  Bible.  Many  apparent  contradictions  have  been  har- 
monized, and  we  may  be  assured  that  all  its  problems  will 
be  solved  in  another  world,  if  not  here.  Some  men  possess 
greater  understanding  than  others.  Some,  who  reject  the 
plenary  inspiration  of  the  Bible,  have  never  attempted  to 
investigate  any  contradiction,  but  nevertheless  have  greater 
demands  on  Scripture  than  on  science  itself,  whose  results 
they  are  ever  ready  to  accept  with  childish  simplicity,  even 
though  science  is  frequently  compelled  to  change  its  dog- 
matic assertions.  It  does  not  lie  within  the  province  of  a 
text-book  on  Dogmatics  to  take  up  the  various  objections 
and  answer  them.  3)  Suggestio  verhoriim.,  or  verbal  in- 
spiration. By  this  is  meant  that  every  word  in  the  original 
text  is  inspired,  not  in  a  mechanical  way  as  in  a  dictation, 
but  in  a  dynamic  sense.  Inasmuch  as  the  Bible  not  only  con- 
tains the  Word  of  God,  but  really  is  the  Word  of  God,  there- 
fore it  is  insufficient  to  acknowledge  that  the  essential  facts 
and  basic  thoughts  are  inspired.  This  would  simply  imply 
that  the  thoughts  were  divine,  but  the  words  human.  If  so, 
we  would  possess  no  certain  ground  for  faith,  as  we  would 
not  surely  know  whether  or  not  the  writers  had  chosen  the 
proper  words.  The  situation  would  not  be  improved  if 
verbal  inspiration  were  confined  to  the  truths  of  salvation 
and  other  important  matters,  since  in  that  case  a  special 
revelation  would  be  necessary  to  decide  whether  or  not  any 


396  ECCLESIOLOtiY. 

particular  Scripture  passage  were  inspired.  The  seeker 
after  salvation  would  then  be  compelled  to  build  his  hope 
on  the  sands  of  human  opinion.  Naturally  the  content  of 
the  Word  of  God  must  possess  an  adequate  form.  The  form 
is  not  only  an  external  garment,  but  a  body  as  well.  Just 
as  the  soul  has  its  body,  so  the  thought  has  its  word. 
Thought  and  word  stand  in  the  closest  relation  to  each  other. 
A  clear  thought  cannot  be  entertained  except  in  the  form 
of  words.  It  is  hardly  possible  that  the  Holy  Spirit  should 
have  imparted  a  mass  of  thought  material  or  a  chaos  of 
ideas  which  the  writers  afterwards  worked  out  and  crystal- 
lized into  verbal  form.  In  that  case  the  Bible  would  have 
become  a  human  message  rather  than  the  Word  of  God. 
It  would  have  been  very  much  more  strange  if  the  Holy 
Spirit  had  inspired  the  writers  with  chaotic  thoughts  than 
if  He  had  inspired  the  words  themselves  in  a  mechanical 
way.  If  we  believe  that  the  thoughts  were  inspired  we 
must  also  believe  logically  that  the  words  were  inspired  as 
well.  Some  persons,  who  do  not  have  a  clear  conception 
concerning  inspiration  and  boast  that  they  are  liberal,  say : 
We  believe  in  the  inspiration  of  the  idea  but  not  of  the 
words.  Even  the  best  modern  Psychology  holds  that  there 
cannot  be  an  idea  without  form  or  words.  The  suggestion 
of  an  idea  implies  some  form  of  the  words,  not  by  dictation 
because  dictation  separates  thought  and  words ;  verbal  dy- 
namic inspiration  unites  them.  Man  thinks  in  words.  In 
dynamic  inspiration  the  Spirit  concurs  with  the  writer  all 
through  in  thought  formation.  In  mechanical  verbal  in- 
spiration the  Holy  Spirit  is  alone  the  thinker  and  dictates 
just  as  an  author  dictates  to  a  stenographer.  This  shows 
the  difference  between  mechanical  and  dynamic  inspiration 
In  the  dynamic  way  the  Spirit  and  the  human  author  work 
together.  The  Holy  Spirit  filled  the  hearts  of  the  writers 
and  brought  about  a  state  in  which  they  were  enabled  to 
receive  the  content  of  revelation  and  in  co-operation  with 
the  Holy  Spirit  adequately  to  set  down  in  writing  all  that 
God  M'ould  have  imparted  to  the  Church.  By  means  of  an 
inspirational  concurrence  of  this  character  we  can  easily 


IXSPIRATIOX    AXD   ATjTHORITY   OF    SCRIPTURE.  397 

comprehend  how  human  peculiarities  might  appear  even  in 
the  choice  of  words,  for  the  Holy  Spirit  did  not  impart  any 
new  linguistic  knowledge  nor  did  He  alter  the  literary 
ability  of  the  writers,  but  co-operated  with  them  just  as 
they  were  constituted.  Even  where  the  writer  was  as 
gifted  as  Paul,  the  treasures  were  nevertheless  contained  in 
earthen  vessels,  as  Paul  himself  acknowledges.  The  Holy 
Scriptures  testify  that  the  words  themselves  possess  sig- 
nificance as  the  Word  of  God.  The  following  proof  passages 
may  be  quoted  in  favor  of  verbal  inspiration :  Ex.  20 :  1 ; 
24:  4;  32:  16;  "Till  heaven  and  earth  pass  away,  one  jot 
or  one  tittle  shall  in  no  wise  pass  away  from  the  law,  till 
all  things  be  accomplished"  (Matt.  5:  18);  "The  oracles 
( Aoyta)  of  God"  (Rom.  3:2);  "Which  things  also  we  speak, 
not  in  words  which  man's  wisdom  teacheth,  but  which  the 
Spirit  teacheth;  comparing  spiritual  things  with  spiritual" 
(1  Cor.  2:  13)  ;  "Sacred  writings  (letters,  ypa/x/xura) "  (2 
Tim.  3 :  15,  16)  ;  compare  Rev.  22 :  19.  Some  objections 
have  been  made  to  verbal  inspiration  with  apparent  sup- 
port from  the  Bible,  e.  g.,  1  Cor.  7 :  10,  12,  25.  But  this  is 
not  a  proof,  as  a  comparison  of  verses  25  and  40  in  accord- 
ance with  the  analogy  of  faith  will  show  that  these  words 
of  Paul  were  likewise  inspired.  Paul  only  states  that  the 
Lord  Jesus  in  His  earthly  ministry  had  expressed  Himself 
directly  in  these  matters  and  cites  what  Christ  had  uttered 
and  places  this  beside  what  he  himself  says  as  inspired  by 
the  Holy  Spirit.  Both  the  expressions  and  the  explanations 
are  therefore  the  inspired  Word  of  God.  It  has  also  been 
objected  that  the  Apostles  quoted  arbitrarily  from  the  Old 
Testament  and  that  the  majority  of  the  quotations  are  taken 
from  the  Septuagint.  However,  the  apostolic  epistles  show- 
that  the  Apostles  regarded  the  books  of  the  Old  Testament 
with  the  greatest  piety.  The  translation  of  the  original  text 
which  was  in  common  use  among  converted  heathens  as  well 
as  among  Jews  was  the  Septuagint.  It  was  but  natural 
therefore,  that  the  Apostles  quoted  from  the  Septuagint. 
They  were  guided  by  the  Holy  Spirit.  Where  the  trans- 
lation was  correct  they  quoted  verbatim,  but  otherwise  they 


398  ECCLESIOLOGY. 

made  the  necessary  correction  in  accordance  with  the  origi- 
nal Hebrew  text.  Inasmuch  as  the  Holy  Spirit  co-operated 
with  them,  free  translation  was  also  the  inspired  Word  of 
God.  In  a  special  measure  they  possessed  the  Holy  Spirit, 
who  directed  them  in  this  as  well  as  other  matters.  With 
regard  to  this  concurrence,  compare  Acts  15:  28:  "For  it 
seemed  good  to  the  Holy  Ghost,  and  to  us."  Other  objec- 
tions might  be  cited,  but  it  is  unnecessary  to  do  so.  When 
we  read  that  every  Scripture  inspired  of  God  is  profitable 
for  teaching,  then  we  draw  the  conclusion  that  the  words 
must  be  inspired,  since  a  scripture  would  not  be  a  scripture 
without  words,  and  it  is  the  Scripture  that  is  inspired. 

3.  The  Attributes  of  Holy  Scripture. 
Affectiones  sen  attributa  scripturae  sacrse  are  the  follow- 
ling:  1)  Auctoritas,  which  contains  two  elements:  a) 
mictoritas  causativa  depending  on  inspiration  or  that  the 
Scriptures  are  the  Word  of  God  through  which  the  assent 
of  man  to  the  saving  truths  is  effected  and  confirmed.  This 
auctoritas  is  proven  by  means  of  the  criteria  interna  et 
externa,  which  are  just  about  the  same  as  the  proofs  for 
the  inspiration  of  the  Bible.  The  authority  of  the  Scrip- 
tures is  not  dependent  on  the  testimony  of  the  Church,  as 
the  Catholics  teach.  The  Church  bears  testimony  minis- 
terially, but  in  the  last  instance  the  Scriptures  must  testify 
of  themselves;  b)  auctoritas  normativa  et  judicialis, 
through  which  the  Scriptures  are  distinguished  from  other 
writings  and  through  which  also  the  true  is  distinguished 
from  the  false.  The  Scripture  is  norma  normans  and  judex 
controversiarum.  The  Church  is  judex  inferior  and  this 
especially  through  miiiisterium  ecclesix,  which  is  judex 
ministerial^  x>uhlicus.  An  enlightened  Christian  is  called 
judex  ministerialis  privatus.  The  Confession  is  normata. 
2)  Perfectio  et  sufficientia,  by  which  is  meant  that  the 
Scriptures  in  a  perfect  and  adequate  way  impart  instruc- 
tion in  all  things  that  are  necessary  for  salvation,  whether 
Kara  prjrov  or  Kara  Bidvoiav.  The  Scriptures  are  not  only  perfect 
in  part  or,  as  the  Catholics  teach,  implicite,  veluti  in  radice. 


INSPIRATION   AND  AUTHORITY   OF   SCRIPTURE.  399 

etc.,  but  in  such  a  complete  way  as  to  be  capable  of  leading 
the  children  of  God  all  the  way  to  their  heavenly  home, 
indeed  they  reveal  very  much  more  than  what  might  ba 
deemed  absolutely  necessary  for  salvation.  The  Catholics 
put  the  Church  above  the  Scriptures.  The  Scriptures  should 
have  declared,  audite  ecclesiam,  but  in  Matt.  17 :  5  we  read, 
hunc  audite.  Christ  speaks  to  us  in  the  Scriptures  and 
constantly  refers  to  them.  As  a  result  of  the  position  of 
the  Catholic  Church  tradition  was  accorded  as  great  promi- 
nence as  the  Word  of  God.  Tradition  was  called  verbum 
Dei  non  scriptum.  Originally  the  Catholics  divided  tradi- 
tion into  divine,  apostolic  and  ecclesiastical  tradition :  di- 
vine, as  having  its  source  in  Christ;  apostolic,  as  coming 
from  the  Apostles,  the  main  content  of  which  was  found  in 
Constitutiones  et  Canones  Apostolici ;  and  ecclesiastical,  in 
which  were  counted  the  decisions  of  ecumenical  councils, 
the  opinions  of  the  Church  Fathers  and  the  decretals  of  the 
popes.  However,  all  the  traditions  are  really  ecclesiastical, 
inasmuch  as  they  receive  their  sanction  through  the  au- 
thority of  the  Church.  In  respect  to  content  the  traditions 
are  divided  into  ritualistic,  historical,  exegetical,  moral, 
apologetic  and  dogmatic  traditions.  Our  Church  does  not 
reject  tradition,  but  accords  to  it  its  proper  value  and  place; 
only  Scripture,  however,  is  norma  normans,  the  confessions 
based  on  Scripture  being  norma  normata.  3)  Perspicidtas^ 
by  which  is  meant  that  the  Scriptures  present  everything 
connected  with  the  way  of  salvation  in  so  clear  and  simple 
a  manner  that  all  can  acquire  this  knowledge.  This  clear- 
ness is  gradualis,  i.  e.,  some  passages  are  clearer  than  others. 
4)  Efficacia,  setting  forth  the  effect  and  activity  of  the 
Scriptures  as  a  means  of  grace.  The  effects  are  made  mani- 
fest by  means  of  the  preaching  of  the  Word  and  in  the 
private  study  of  the  Bible.  Both  ways  are  necessary ;  it  is 
not  sufficient  to  distribute  Bibles,  the  Word  of  God  must 
also  be  preached  and  the  Sacraments  administered. 


400  EC(i,Ksior.o(iY. 

4.    Notes  on  the  History  of  Dogma. 

The  concept  of  inspiration  was  not  closely  defined  in  the 
post-Apostolic  period.  During  the  first  two  historical  peri- 
ods the  mantic  or  mystic  theory  was  supported  by  many.  In 
accordance  with  this  theory  the  writers  were  taken  abso- 
lute possession  of  by  the  Holy  Spirit  and  transformed 
into  a  state  of  ecstasy,  losing  all  power  of  volition.  Others 
supported  this  theory  in  modified  form,  while  still  others 
entertained  more  liberal  views.  With  few  exceptions  there 
prevailed  during  the  Scholastic  period  a  rigid  conception 
of  inspiration  which  was  extended,  however,  to  tradition 
and  the  decision  of  councils.  Later  on  different  views  came 
into  evidence.  The  Jesuits  supported  more  liberal  views 
in  which  inspiration  was  confined  only  to  the  doctrinal  con- 
tent. The  Roman  Church  underestimates  inspiration  in 
a  general  sense  because  of  the  fact  that  it  lays  so  much 
stress  on  tradition,  for  which  reason  inspiration  is  prin- 
cipally considered  as  an  assistentia  et  directio  Spiritus 
sancti.  In  the  Lutheran  Confessions  verbal  inspiration  is 
reckoned  as  a  presupposition.  The  Reformed  Church  leans 
toward  a  mechanical  conception  of  inspiration  and  in  gen- 
eral rejects  tradition.  The  old  Dogmaticians  to  a  greater 
or  less  extent  supported  the  strict  mechanical  theory.  In 
more  recent  times  the  following  theories  have  been  sup- 
ported:  The  mechanical,  the  naturalistic  or  latitudinarian. 
the  modern  theory  of  limitation  and  the  dynamic  theory, 
The  mechanical  theory,  which  prevailed  during  the  Prot- 
estant Scholastic  period,  implied  that  the  writers  were  the 
pens,  hands  or  amanuenses  of  the  Holy  Spirit,  while  it 
failed  to  attach  proper  significance  to  the  personality  of 
the  writer.  The  naturalistic  theory  is  of  the  lowest  type 
and  declares  that  the  Bible  is  like  other  good  books  and  that 
its  inspiration  simply  consists  in  a  lofty  flight  of  poetic 
fancy.  The  modern  theory  of  limitation  implies  that  in- 
spiration is  to  a  greater  or  less  extent  limited.  On  the  one 
hand,  it  is  said  to  embrace  only  the  thought ;  on  the  other 
hand,  where  verbal  inspiration  is  accepted,  it  is  said  to  be 


IXSPIKATIOX    AM)   AUTHORITY   OF   SCRIPTURE.  401 

limited  to  the  real  material  of  revelation  or  the  facts  of 
salvation.  The  Bible  contains  the  Word  of  God,  but  is  not 
the  Word  of  God.  The  dynamic  theory,  which  is  generally 
accepted  by  the  orthodox  theologians  of  to-day,  declares 
inspiration  to  be  the  supernatural  dynamic  influence  of  the 
Holy  Spirit  on  the  human  spirit,  by  which  the  holy  writers 
without  losing  their  independence  were  enabled  adequately 
as  to  thought  and  expression  to  impart  the  divine  truth,  so 
that  the  inspiration  was  complete  or  plenary. 

Clement  of  Rojie  and  Ignatius  do  not  present  any  special  theory  of 
inspiration,  but  merely  make  use  of  Biblical  expressions  in  reference 
thereto.  Justin  Martyr  speaks  of  the  writers  as  the  instruments  of 
the  Holy  Spirit.  As  the  bow  produces  tones  in  being  drawn  across 
the  strings  of  a  musical  instrument,  so  God  used  the  holy  authors  as 
instruments,  but  inspiration  was  limited  to  the  religious  content. 
Athenagoras  makes  use  of  the  figure  of  a  flute-player  and  the  flute. 
Tertullian  supported  the  mantic  theory.  Iren.eus  believed  in  verbal 
inspiration,  but  laid  stress  on  the  human  element  and  speaks  of  the 
faulty  syntax  in  Paul's  writing.  Origen  did  not  accept  the  mantic 
theory,  but  still  he  spoke  of  a  passive  state.  The  Holy  Spirit  increased 
the  spiritual  powers. 

EusEBius  OF  C.^sarea  adopted  the  strict  theory  of  inspiration  and 
taught  that  the  writers  were  guided  by  the  Holy  Spirit  in  such  a  rigid 
manner  that  they  could  not  substitute  a  single  name  or  word  for  any 
other.  Jerome  said  that  the  Scripture  was  perfectly  inspired,  but  ac- 
knowledged the  human  element  and  stated  that  there  were  to  be  found 
solecisms  and  incomplete  sentences  in  the  writings  of  Paul.  Augustine 
compared  the  Apostles  to  hands  which  wrote  in  accordance  with  dicta- 
tion, but  he  says  at  one  place  that  the  Evangelists  wrote  as  they 
remembered,  either  briefly  or  more  at  length.  Gregory  the  Great. 
who  stated  that  the  Holy  Ghost  was  the  author  of  the  Book  of  Job, 
nevertheless  allowed  the  privilege  of  making  investigations  with  re- 
gard to  its  human  authorship.  John  of  Damascus  declared  that  it 
was  through  the  Holy  Spirit  that  the  Law  and  the  Gospel,  Evangelists 
and  Apostles,  pastors  and  teachers  had  spoken.  The  Holy  Scriptures 
were  inspired  throughout  by  God. 

Agobard  of  Lyons  entertained  liberal  views  on  inspiration  and  re- 
jected the  theory  that  the  words  had  been  dictated  by  God.  He  also 
said  that  the  writers  had  violated  grammatical  rules.  Fredigis  of 
Tours  defended  the  strict  theory  of  inspiration.  Abelard  did  not 
regard  the  writers  as  faultless.  He  also  pointed  out  contradictions  in 
the  traditions.  Thomas  of  Aquinas  presented  varying  degrees  of  in- 
spiration, stating  that  David  knew  more  than  Moses,  etc.     The  Council 

Dogmatics.     14. 


402  KCCLESIOLOGY. 

Of  Trent  determined  nothing  concernins  inspiration,  but  in  referring 
to  the  purity  of  the  Gospel  as  containing  the  saving  truth  and  moral 
discipline,  the  council  expresses  itself  in  the  following  manner  with 
reference  to  tradition  and  the  Scripture:*  "Seeing  clearly  that  this 
truth  and  discipline  are  contained  in  the  written  books,  and  the  un- 
written traditions  which,  received  by  the  Apostles  themselves,  the  Holy 
Ghost  dictating,  have  come  down  even  unto  us,  transmitted  as  it  were 
from  hand  to  hand;  (the  Synod)  following  the  examples  of  the  ortho- 
dox Fathers,  receives  and  venerates  with  an  equal  affection  of  piety, 
and  reverence,  all  the  books  of  the  Old  and  of  the  New  Testament — 
seeing  that  one  God  is  the  author  of  both — as  also  the  said  traditions, 
as  well  those  pertaining  to  faith  as  to  morals,  as  having  been  dictated, 
either  by  Christ's  own  word  of  mouth,  or  by  the  Holy  Ghost,  and 
preserved  in  the  Catholic  Church  by  a  continuous  succession."  Bel- 
LARMiN  divides  tradition  into  traditio  divina,  apostolica  et  ecclesiastica. 
He  says  that  tradition  is  necessary  because  of  the  incompleteness  of 
the  Scriptures.  With  regard  to  Inspiration  there  were  two  tendencies 
that  developed  within  the  Catholic  Church.  The  Jansenists  defended 
the  strictest  sort  of  verbal  inspiration,  the  Jesuits  as  well  as  others 
in  the  Catholic  Church  held  a  more  liberal  view. 

LuTiiER  expressed  himself  differently  at  different  periods  in  his  life, 
especially  with  regard  to  certain  books,  but  he  entertained  the 
deepest  piety  for  the  Word  of  God,  which  became  the  formal  prin- 
ciple of  the  Lutheran  Church.  He  set  forth  both  the  divine  and  human 
character  of  inspiration.  Although  at  times  his  expressions  wore 
somewhat  free,  still  at  other  times  he  declared  that  not  a  single  jot 
of  the  Scriptures  had  been  written  in  vain,  neither  were  there  to  be 
found  any  contradictions  in  them.  Zwixgli  acknowledges  the  perfection 
of  the  Scriptures,  although  he  states  that  possibly  some  relative  faults 
may  be  found,  without,  however,  doing  any  harm  to  the  real  truth- 
content.  Calvix  supported  a  stricter  theory  of  inspiration,  but  points 
out,  nevertheless,  the  human  element  which  appears  in  the  divergent 
styles  of  the  writers.  Fonnula  Consensus  Helvetica  says  that  the 
Hebrew  vowal  signs  are  inspired  just  as  the  words  themselves.  In 
this  way  the  Scriptures  become  a  law  of  the  letter.  In  the  practical 
interpretation  of  the  Scriptures,  however,  the  Reformed  Church  has 
assumed  great  freedom,  which  has  borne  fruit  in  a  great  number  of 
sects  detrimental  to  the  unity  of  the  Church.  The  Socinians  held  that 
inspiration  was  confined  to  that  which  was  essential,  but  that  mistakes 
could  easily  have  been  made  in  unessentials.  The  Arminians  limited 
inspiration  to  the  doctrines  of  faith  and  morals.  It  w-as  not  necessary 
to  conceive  that  the  historical  sections  of  the  Bible  had  been  dictated 
by  the  Holy  Ghost.  Inspiration  was  an  assistentia  divina.  The  Bible 
contains  much  that  has  no  significance  for  the  Christian  religion.    As 

♦  Sessio  IV. 


INSPIRATION  AND  AUTHORITY  OF  SCRIPTURE.  403 

has  already  been  mentioned,  the  Lutheran  theologians  from  the  time 
of  Chemnitz  supported  a  strict  tlieory  of  inspiration.  The  theories 
established  by  Chemnitz  and  Gerhard  were  afterwards  developed  by 
Calovius,  Quenstedt  and  Dannhauer.  The  loose  theories  of  the  So- 
cinians,  Arminians  and  Syncretists  were  disproved.  There  were  some 
Dogmaticians  who  carried  the  mechanical  theory  to  the  extreme,  de- 
claring that  the  vowel  signs,  etc.,  were  inspired  and  that  the  words 
were  dictated,  the  difference  in  the  styles  of  the  writers  depending 
on  the  accommodation  of  the  Holy  Spirit.  Qupjnstedt  says,  however, 
that  the  authors  wrote  cheerfully,  willingly  and  intelligently.  The 
old  Dogmaticians  aimed  to  establish  the  truth  that  the  Bible  is  the 
Word  of  God,  but  their  method  of  explanation  was  somewhat  one- 
sided and  was  probably  misunderstood.  Calixtus  held  very  liberal 
views,  declaring  inspiration  to  include  only  the  essential  objects  of 
faith.  That  which  could  be  comprehended  by  the  material  sense  was 
not  inspired.  Mus.eus  hesitated  about  accepting  verbal  inspiration 
and  took  the  position  that  the  content  of  Scripture  alone  was  inspired. 

But  Rationalism  and  the  modern  critical  school  soon  started  the 
work  of  undermining  the  Scriptures.  Deism  in  England  set  forth  its 
doubts  relative  to  the  divine  origin  of  the  Scriptures  as  well  as  with 
regard  to  the  trustworthiness  of  the  writers.  Voltaire  and  the  En- 
cyclopedists in  Prance  in  a  degrading  way  attacked  the  historical 
contents  of  the  Bible.  In  Germany  the  attacks  on  Christianity  and 
the  Word  of  God  were  clothed  in  a  more  scientific  form.  Pfaff  sup- 
ported a  liberal  theory,  accepting  a  suggestio  divina  with  regard  to 
the  truths  of  faith,  a  directio  in  relation  to  historical  facts  and  denying 
inspiration  in  inessentials.  Tollner  reduced  inspiration  to  divine 
influence  in  general.  Semler  set  forth  the  human  origin  of  the  canon 
and  advocated  the  theory  of  accommodation.  Ernesti  pointed  out  the 
individual  characteristics  in  the  language  of  the  authors.  The  medi- 
ating theologians  in  general  express  themselves  with  uncertainty  in 
regard  to  inspiration.  Schleiermacher  did  not  acknowledge  any 
direct  divine  inspiration.  He  considered  that  it  was  the  fellowship 
spirit  in  the  Church  that  constituted  the  moving  power  in  the  so-called 
inspiration,  but  not  the  Holy  Spirit.  The  spirit  of  inspiration  was  the 
spirit  of  the  common  consciousness  of  the  Christian  Church  working 
through  the  deepest  emotions  and  finding  its  loftiest  expression  in 
Christ.  Following  Kant  and  Fries,  De  Wette  conceived  of  inspiration 
as  an  expression  of  the  religious  presentiment  of  man,  that  there  was 
a  dTvine-natural  influence  which  was  exerted  not  on  the  intellect  but 
in  relation  to  the  faith  and  the  emotions  of  the  writers.  According  to 
the  Hegelian  philosophy,  represented  by  Daub  and  others  in  theology, 
inspiration  was  merely  an  expression  of  the  divine  life  which  arises 
when  God  reaches  the  stage  of  self-consciousness  and  realizes  Himself 
in  the  souls  of  men.     Tholuck,  Rothe,  Kahnis  and  others  supported 


404  ECCLESIOLOGY. 

the  old  theory  of  inspiration.  Stieu  inclined  to  the  so-called  theory 
of  limitation.  Almost  without  exception  those  who  reject  the  orthodox 
theory  have  adopted  the  theory  of  limitation  in  one  form  or  another. 
It  is  unnecessary  to  enumerate  the  names  of  the  leading  representa- 
tives of  the  modern  Bible  critical  movement.  Of  course,  these  men 
do  not  support  the  old  theory  of  inspiration.  Nevertheless,  the  con- 
servative position  will  finally  prevail.  Grum)tvig  placed  the  Apostles' 
Creed  as  a  living  word  even  above  the  written  Word  and  declared  this 
symbol  to  be  inspired.  Philippi  speaks  of  different  forms  of  inspira- 
tion. The  first  is  the  historical  form,  in  which  the  spirit  of  man 
and  the  objects  of  revelation  stand  in  external  relation  to  each  other. 
The  second  form  is  prophetical,  in  which  revelation  and  inspiration 
approach  each  other  more  closely.  In  this  form  inspiration  renders 
the  prophet  capable  of  correctly  transcribing  what  has  been  seen  in 
the  state  of  ecstasy  and  in  vision.  The  highest  form  is  the  apostolical, 
in  which  inspiration  proceeds  from  revelation  independently  appropri- 
ated. In  this  last  form  revelation  and  inspiration  are  intimately 
related.  Philippi  defends  verbal  inspiration,  but  malves  a  distinction 
between  Wort  inspiration  and  Wörtcrinsinration*  He  adopts  the  former 
and  declares  the  latter  to  be  unnecssary.  In  this  way  he  endeavored 
to  avoid  the  difficulties  that  the  divergent  readings  and  variants  had 
thrown  in  the  way.  But  what  distinction  can  be  made  between  "word" 
and  "words"  in  the  theory  of  inspiration?  The  way  he  seems  to  ex- 
plain it  is  the  following:  The  inspired  writer  originated  a  sequence 
of  ideas  that  as  a  whole  was  inspired  dynamically  both  in  thought  and 
language.  But  the  words,  taken  one  by  one,  were  not  separately  sug- 
gested. Thomasius  presents  inspiration  as  an  illumination  of  the 
Holy  Spirit  through  which  He  imparted  to  the  writers  a  correct  under- 
standing of  the  content  of  revelation  and  gave  them  power  infallibly 
and  adequately  to  write  that  which  He  revealed,  having  reference  both 
to  their  spoken  and  their  written  words.  All  orthodox  theologians 
advocate  a  plenary  theory  of  inspiration,  Including  both  material  con- 
tent and  verbal  expression. 

§35.     THE  WORD  OF  GOD  AS  A  MEANS  OF  GRACE. 

The  Lutheran  Reformation  restored  the  Word  of  God  not 
only  to  its  place  as  a  norma  normans  but  also  as  a  means  of 
grace.  The  Word  of  God  is  a  means  of  grace  in  whatsoever 
form  it  may  be  used,  whether  it  be  read,  heard  or  recalled 
in  memory,  Quenstedt**  remarks  that  we  must  distinguish 
between  the  Word  of  God  as  it  is  materially  expressed  and 

*  Philippi,  Glaubenslehre.     Dritte  auflage.  I,  p.  252. 
**  From  H.  Schmid.  translated  by  Hay  and  Jacobs. 


THE  WORD  OF  GOD  AS   A   MEAT^fS  OF  GRACE.  405 

exhibited  in  the  written  characters,  etc.,  and  formally  con- 
sidered, as  the  divine  conception  and  sense  which  we  find 
expressed  in  these  written  letters  and  syllables  and  in  the 
words  of  the  preached  Gospel.  In  the  former  sense  it  is 
called  the  Word  of  God  only  figuratively  (crr}ixavTLKw<; )  ;  while 
in  the  latter  sense  (/cuptV)  it  is  properly  and  strictly  the 
Word  of  God,  to  which  are  ascribed  divine  power  and  effi- 
cacy. The  preached  Word  is  a  means  of  grace  insofar  as  it 
agrees  with  the  Scriptures  and  presents  the  Biblical  con- 
tent of  faith.  ''So  belief  cometh  of  hearing,  and  hearing  by 
the  word  of  Christ"  (Rom.  10:  17). 

1.    The  Power  of  the  Word  of  God  as  a  Means  of  Grace. 

The  Word  of  God  is  efficacious  not  only  objectively  as 
revealing  the  divine  purpose  of  salvation,  but  also  sub- 
jectively as  possessing  power  unto  regeneration  and  sancti- 
fication.  The  Word  possesses  this  power  because  it  is  the 
living  Word  of  God  in  which  He  speaks  to  us  through  His 
Spirit.  The  effects  are  produced  principaliter  through  the 
Holy  Spirit  and  instrumentaliier  by  means  of  the  Word. 
God  has  not  once  for  all  given  us  His  Word  and  then  for- 
saken us ;  He  is  actively  present  whenever  the  Word  of  God. 
is  read  and  preached.  The  Holy  Ghost  does  not  operate 
alongside  of  the  Word,  but  in  and  through  the  Word,  so  that 
the  Word  of  God  is  actually  a  vehicle  or  bearer  of  the  grace 
of  God.  In  this  connection  Hollazius  says:*  "It  possesses 
and  retains  its  internal  power  and  efficacy  even  when  not 
used,  just  as  the  illuminating  power  of  the  sun  continues, 
although,  when  the  shadow  of  the  moon  intervenes,  no  per- 
son may  see  it;  and  just  as  an  internal  efficacy  belongs  to 
the  seed,  although  it  may  not  be  sown  in  the  field."  The 
Word  of  God  retains  its  power  even  extra  usum.  With 
regard  to  the  relation  between  the  power  and  operation  of 
the  Word  of  God  Quenstedt  teaches  that  the  Holy  Ghost 
does  not  do  something  by  Himself  and  the  Word  of  God 
something  else  by  itself,  but  they  produce  the  one  effect  by 
one  and  the  same  action,  just  as  the  soul  and  the  eye  see, 

*  Exam.  Theol.  Acroam.     Pars  III,  §2,  Cap.  j,  p.  455, 


406  ECCLESIOLOUY. 

not  by  distinct  actions,  but  by  a  single  action.  Relative  to 
the  power  and  efficacy  of  the  Word  of  God,  compare  the 
following  passages:  John  6:  63;  Acts  7:  38;  1  Cor.  2:4: 
1  Thess.  2 :  13 ;  2  Tim.  3:15;  Heb.  4 :  12 ;  1  Peter  1 :  23 ; 
1  John  1:1;  James  1 :  21. 

2.  Negative  and  Positive  Terms. 
In  the  presentation  of  the  Word  of  God  as  a  means  of 
grace  there  are  certain  terms  used  to  define  more  closely 
the  content  of  this  doctrine  both  from  the  negative  and  the 
positive  point  of  view.  The  negative  terms  are  the  follow- 
ing: 1)  no7i  efficacia  physica,  inasmuch  as  the  Word  of  God 
does  not  operate  physically  as  when  a  person  comes  in  con- 
tact with  a  material  object.  The  W^ord  of  God  is  preached 
and  heard,  but  the  efficacy  does  not  lie  in  the  physical  act, 
thereby  producing  regeneration ;  2)  non  mere  naturalis,  so 
that  the  Word  of  God  would  be  as  efficacious  as  other  good 
books  and  no  more.  Of  course,  the  Word  of  God  possesses 
natural  power  or  efficacia  naturalis,  and  in  that  sense  the 
Bible  is  the  Book  of  books,  but  the  power  of  the  Word  of  God 
exceeds  the  influence  of  the  best  books  of  man,  inasmuch  as 
the  effects  produced  by  the  Scriptures  are  not  only  temporal 
but  eternal  and  determine  the  true  welfare  of  man;  3)  non 
mere  significativa,  as,  e.  g.,  a  monument  or  a  sign-post.  A 
sign-post  may  show  the  way,  but  imparts  no  strength  for 
the  journey.  The  positive  terms  are  the  following:  1) 
mo7'alis,  inasmuch  as  the  Word  of  God  enlightens  the  mind, 
moves  the  will  and  purifies  the  emotions,  so  that  man  is 
converted  and  sanctified,  provided  no  opposition  is  made  to 
the  gracious  work  of  the  Spirit;  2)  svpernatiwalis,  as  an 
effect  of  divine  power,  inasmuch  as  the  gracious  work  of 
regeneration  unto  life  eternal  cannot  be  performed  by  the 
mere  word  of  man ;  3)  effectiva,  since  the  Word  of  God  does 
not  merely  possess  its  inward  power,  but  operates  in  its 
divinely  appointed  way;  4)  essentialis,  inasmuch  as  this 
power  is  always  resident  in  the  Word  by  reason  of  the  con- 
tinued union  of  the  Holy  Spirit  with  the  Word;  5)  ordinata 
by  reason  of  the  relation  of  men  to  the  Word,  which  does 


THE   WOKO   OF    GOD   AS    A    MEAXS   OF   GRACE.  407 

not  operate  in  a  mechanical  and  compulsory  manner,  nor 
ex  opere  operate,  wherefore  the  following  term  is  also  used ; 
6)   resistibiUs,  or  that  the  Word  may  be  resisted. 

3.    The  Contents  of  the  Word,  or  the  Law  and  the 

Gospel. 

The  Word  of  God  is  divided  with  regard  to  its  contents 
into  the  Law  and  the  Gospel.  The  term  law  is  used  in  a 
variety  of  senses.  In  the  most  general  sense  it  refers  com- 
prehensively to  the  teachings  of  the  whole  Scripture  and 
therefore  also  includes  the  Gospel  (Ps.  1 :  2) .  In  the  general 
sense  law  refers  to  the  Old  Testament  (1  Cor.  14:  21). 
In  a  restricted  sense  law  is  understood  to  comprise  tha 
Pentateuch  as  distinguished  from  the  Psalms  and  the 
Prophets  (Luke  24:  44).  In  the  most  restricted  sense  law 
is  that  part  of  the  Word  of  God  which  is  contrasted  with 
gospel.  This  is  also  the  ordinary  sense  in  which  the  two 
terms  are  used  (Rom.  13:  8' — 10). 

Lex,  or  the  Law,  is  divided  in  the  following  manner:  1) 
moralis;  2)  ccremonialis ;  3)  forensis.  Lex  moralis  is  the 
Law  in  the  ordinary  sense  and  is  still  applicable  in  accord- 
ance with  the  doctrine  of  the  use  of  the  Law.  Lex  cere- 
monialis  in  the  Old  Testament  set  forth  the  regulations  and 
ceremonies  connected  with  the  divine  service  of  the  chosen 
people,  revealed  the  uncleanness  of  sin,  admonished  tho 
people  to  lead  holy  lives  and  in  a  typical  way  set  forth  the 
blessing  which  would  become  real  through  the  advent  of 
Christ.  Lex  forensis  had  for  its  object  the  maintenance  of 
external  discipline  in  the  civil  life  of  the  Jews  and  to  pre- 
serve their  national  prerogatives  and  position  in  relation 
to  other  nations.  HOLLAZius  also  speaks  of  lex  primordialis 
or  the  law  that  was  given  to  our  first  parents.  He  says. 
however,  that  this  law  does  not  differ  from  the  Sinaitic  Law 
in  substance  of  doctrine,  but  in  the  mode  of  revelation. 

Usus  legis,  or  the  use  of  the  Law,  is  threefold:  1)  usus 
politicus,  which  has  reference  to  external  discipline  and  is 
therefore  a  benefit  accruing  from  the  Law  in  which  the 
unconverted  also  share,  although  they  do  not  often  acknowl- 


408  Lcci.Ksioi.oc;^'. 

edge  it;  2)  itsus  elenchticiis  sen  ^jxdagogicus,  by  which  the 
Law  convicts  man  of  his  sinful  and  guilty  state,  admonishes 
him  to  seek  salvation  and  thus  becomes  a  tutor  to  bring  men 
to  Christ;  3)  usus  didacticui^,  which  consists  in  the  efficacy 
of  the  Law  as  a  perpetual  rule  of  life.  The  doctrine  of  the 
Christian's  relation  to  the  Law  stands  in  connection  with 
this  use  of  the  Law.  In  a  certain  sense  the  believers  are 
free  from  the  Law,  having  been  liberated  from  the  bondage 
and  condemnation  of  the  Law  through  their  justification  in 
Christ.  Before  God,  therefore,  they  are  no  longer  under 
the  Law,  but  under  grace.  The  Law  does  not  exercise  any 
compulsion  over  them.  Compare  the  following  passages : 
"Ye  also  were  made  dead  to  the  law  through  the  body  of 
Christ;  that  ye  should  be  joined  to  another"  (Rom.  7:  4)  : 
"There  is  therefore  now  no  condemnation  to  them  that  are 
in  Christ  Jesus"  (Rom.  8:1);  "With  freedom  did  Christ 
set  us  free"  (Gal.  5:1);  compare  also  Gal.  3:  13,  25;  4:  31. 
However,  the  believers  are  nevertheless  bound  by  the  Law 
in  their  daily  walk  and  conversation.  Yet  this  is  not  con- 
sidered a  burden,  inasmuch  as  the  Law  is  written  in  their 
hearts.  They  stand  in  need  of  the  Law  because  their  reno- 
vation is  not  complete, — the  old  man  must  be  crucified  day 
by  day.  They  need  the  Law,  moreover,  as  a  means  of  edu- 
cation and  to  keep  them  in  humility  as  they  compare  the 
progress  they  make  in  sanctification  with  the  demands  of 
the  Law,  In  this  comparison  they  are  sensible  of  a  judg- 
ment, but  not  as  though  they  would  again  come  under  the 
condemnation  of  the  Law ;  rather  they  are  thereby  impelled 
to  repair  daily  to  Christ  and  His  saving  grace  and  to  pray 
for  renewed  strength  to  fight  against  sin  and  to  walk  in  the 
way  of  sanctification.  The  believers  are  therefore  in  the 
Law,  but  not  under  the  Law.  Compare  Rom.  7:6:  "But 
now  we  have  been  discharged  from  the  law,  having  died  to 
that  wherein  we  were  holden ;  so  that  we  serve  in  newness 
of  spirit,  and  not  in  oldness  of  the  letter."  See  also  John 
15:  10;  Gal.  5:  18—24;  1  Tim.  1:  8,  9;  1  John  2:  3;  3'  19 
—22 ;  James  1 :  22—25. 

Effectiis  legis,  or  the  effects  of  the  Law  in  a  primary 


THE   WORD   OF   GOD   AS    A    MEANS   OF   GRACE.  409 

sense  as  contradistinguished  from  the  Gospel,  are  contritio, 
terrores  conscientise,  or  contrition.  The  effect  of  the  Law 
in  this  sense  belongs  to  usus  elenchticus  seu  psedagogicus. 
Poenitentia  in  a  restricted  sense  is  the  same  as  contritio 
and  when  so  regarded  the  Law  may  be  said  to  be  concio 
poenitentise.  It  is  also  taught  that  the  Law  and  not  the 
Gospel  reproves  unbelief. 

Like  the  term  law,  the  word  gospel  is  used  in  a  variety 
of  senses.  In  the  most  general  sense  gospel  is  understood 
to  mean  the  teachings  of  the  New  Testament  taken  as  a 
whole  (Mark  16:  15).  In  the  geyieral  sense  gospel  refers 
to  the  account  of  salvation  as  contained  in  the  four  Gospels 
(Mark  1:1).  In  a  restricted  sense  gospel  signifies  the 
gracious  promises  of  God  both  in  the  Old  and  in  the  New 
Testament  (Rom.  1:  1,  2).  In  its  most  restricted  and  real 
sense  gospel  is  the  New  Testament  doctrine  of  salvation. 
This  is  the  sense  in  which  the  term  is  generally  understood 
(Mark  1:  15). 

The  Gospel,  therefore,  presents  the  work  of  Christ,  which 
has  already  been  treated  dogmatically  in  the  sections  on 
Christology  and  Soteriology.  While  there  is  a  real  distinc- 
tion between  the  Law  and  the  Gospel,  still  they  are  organ- 
ically connected,  inasmuch  as  they  complement  each  other. 
Both  are  necessary.  This  can  be  seen  in  poenitentia,  which 
consists  in  contrition  and  faith.  The  Law  works  contrition 
and  the  Gospel  faith.  The  Law  cannot  save,  and  no  man 
can  fulfill  the  Law  so  as  thereby  to  be  saved,  but  the  Gospel 
contains  the  saving  grace  of  God.  Effectus  evangelii  is 
therefore  saving  faith,  inasmuch  as  the  Gospel  declares  and 
imparts  to  us  the  forgiveness  of  sin,  while  the  Holy  Spirit 
operates  through  the  Gospel  to  the  end  that  by  faith  we 
may  accept  the  grace  of  God  and  become  justified.  Faith 
could  not  be  produced  except  through  the  Gospel.  Compare 
Rom.  8:  3;. 1:  16;  10:  15—17;  1  Cor.  15:  1,2. 

4.    Notes  on  the  History  of  Dogma. 
The  earliest  Church  Fathers  set  forth  the  great  power  of 
the  Word  of  God,  but  there  was  no  dogmatic  formulation 


410  IXC'I.KSIOLOCY. 

of  doctrine.  Although  the  influence  of  tradition  began  to 
be  felt,  still  the  Word  of  God  as  a  means  of  grace  occupied 
the  dominating  position  until  the  Scholastic  period.  The 
high  regard  which  the  Scholastics  entertained  for  tradition 
together  with  the  supremacy  of  the  Church  in  all  things  to 
a  great  extent  eclipsed  the  significance  of  the  Word,  in  con- 
sequence of  which  preaching  was  greatly  neglected  during 
the  Middle  Ages.  There  were  of  course  exceptions,  such 
as  Bernhard  of  Clairvaux,  who  was  indeed  a  truly  evan- 
gelical witness.  The  services  were  conducted  in  Latin.  The 
Bible  was  a  closed  book.  In  accordance  with  the  Catholic 
doctrine  the  Word  is  not  a  means  of  grace  in  the  real  sense, 
rather  it  is  a  source  of  knowledge  and  operates  on  the  in- 
tellect, producing  a  faith  whose  essence  is  assent.  The 
Church  also  exercises  its  influence  in  addition  to  the  power 
of  the  Word.  The  Catholic  Church  regards  Christianity 
•as  a  nova  lex.  The  Lutheran  Reformation  set  forth  the 
power  and  efficacy  of  the  Word  of  God  as  a  means  of  grace 
together  with  the  importance  of  hearing  and  reading  it.  It 
stated  clearly  that  the  Holy  Spirit  is  connected  with  the 
Word  and  operates  through  it.  Sharp  distinctions  as  be- 
tween the  Law  and  the  Gospel  were  set  forth,  but  by  reason 
of  divergent  definitions  there  arose  a  certain  amount  of  con- 
fusion as  to  terminology,  giving  rise  to  difficulties  in  the 
Antinomian  controversy.  The  Reformed  Church  does  not 
consider  the  Word  of  God  as  a  means  of  grace  in  the  real 
sense.  In  a  study  of  Calvinism  we  find  that  the  Word  of 
God  is  efficacious  merely  upon  the  elect.  The  Holy  Spirit 
does  not  operate  through  the  Word,  but  rather  by  the  side 
of  it.  However,  the  great  significance  of  the  Word  of  God 
is  emphasized.  Of  course,  in  modern  times  the  significance 
of  the  Word  as  a  means  of  grace  is  minimized  by  all  who 
accept  the  modern  higher  critical  views  of  the  Bible.  It 
may  nevertheless  be  said  that  all  the  Protestant  denomina- 
tions emphasize  the  great  value  of  the  Scriptures  and  labor 
for  the  spreading  of  the  Bible,  but  it  is  the  Lutheran  Church 
as  founded  upon  the  truths  of  the  Bible,  which  especially 
sets  forth  the  Word  of  God  as  a  means  of  grace. 


THE   WORD   OF   GOD  AS    A    iMEANS   OF   GRACE.  411 

Justin  Martyr,  Tebtullian  and  others  set  forth  the  great  power  of 
the  Word  of  God  unto  regeneration  and  sanctification.  Clement  of 
Alexandria  and  Origen  speak  of  the  sanctifying  power  of  the  Word 
of  God. 

Chrysostoji  and  Augustine  emphasized  the  significance  of  diligently 
reading  the  Word  of  God,  the  latter  comparing  the  power  and  efficacy 
of  the  Word  of  God  to  that  of  medicine. 

Inasmuch  as  tradition  during  the  Middle  Ages  was  placed  on  the 
same  plane  as  the  Word  of  God,  with  the  Church  the  interpreter  of 
both,  there  was  not  a  great  deal  of  importance  attached  to  the  written 
Word.  It  is  evident  that  since  the  people  did  not  possess  the  Scrip- 
tures in  their  own  language,  and  since  the  preaching  in  the  churches 
was  increasingly  neglected,  the  significance  of  the  Word  of  God  was 
not  felt  or  else  it  was  ignored.  Innocent  III  forbade  the  reading  of 
the  Bible,  so  that  the  people  became  altogether  dependent  on  the  scant 
expositions  of  the  Word  given  by  the  priests.  The  forerunners  of  the 
Reformation,  however,  placed  great  value  on  the  Word.  Wickliffe 
and  others  labored  for  the  dissemination  of  the  Word  among  the  people. 

Luther  laid  great  stress  on  the  Word  of  God  as  a  means  of  grace. 
He  called  the  Word  vehiculum  gratise.  Zwingli  did  not  consider  that 
God  needed  any  means  of  grace,  but  that  He  operated  directly  through 
the  Spirit.  Melanchthon  in  his  articles  of  visitation  set  forth  the 
importance  of  true  penitence.  He  points  out  the  significance  of  preach- 
ing the  whole  Gospel  and  declares  in  this  connection  that  the  Gospel 
is  concio  pcenitentise.  But  Melanchthon  viewed  the  Gospel  in  this 
instance  as  well  as  in  the  Apology  in  a  broad  sense.  Really  Melanch- 
thon taught  the  same  as  the  Lutheran  Church  that  the  Law  is  concio 
pcenitentise  (stricte  contritionis)  and  that  the  Gospel  is  concio  plena 
consolationis.  The  confusion  in  the  use  of  terms  gave  rise  to  the 
Antinomian  struggle  in  Lutheran  form.  The  Augsburg  Confession 
states  that  pcenitentia  consists  of  contritio  et  fides.  This  was  a  new 
conception,  inasmuch  as  the  Catholic  Church  taught  that  fides  was 
not  a  part  of  pcenitentia.  According  to  the  Lutheran  position  pceni- 
tentia was  tantamount  to  conversio.  On  the  other  hand,  the  Catholic 
Church  taught  that  conversio  was  only  contritio.  Agricola  gave  an- 
other answer  than  the  Lutherans  to  the  question:  How  is  contrition 
produced?  He  stated  that  the  Gospel  is  the  true  concio  pcenitentise, 
viewing  the  Gospel  in  the  ordinary  sense,  and  not  in  the  broad  sense, 
as  Melanchthon  did.  In  support  of  his  position  he  cites  the  conversion 
of  Saul.  He  declares  that  penitence  was  not  to  be  learnt  from  the 
Law  of  Moses,  but  from  the  suffering  and  death  of  the  Son  of  God; 
the  Law  ought  really  not  to  be  learnt  during  any  stage  of  the  process 
of  sanctification  nor  prior  to  it.  Contritio  prior  to  faith  has  no  sig- 
nificance for  salvation;  only  the  contrition  which  succeeds  faith  pos- 
sesses  this   significance.     This   contrition   does   not   consist   in   sorrow 


412  RCCLESIOI.OGY. 

because  of  any  transgression  of  the  Law,  but  because  of  sin  against 
Christ.  The  relationship  between  the  Law  and  the  Gospel  was  dis- 
solved, the  latter  being  shorn  of  its  peculiar  significance  and  becoming 
a  legal  Gospel.  Andkeas  Poach  declared  that  the  Law  even  per  se 
was  not  normative  in  relation  to  the  righteousness  demanded  by  God. 
Even  if  a  person  were  to  fulfill  the  Law  perfectly,  the  Law  nevertheless 
could  not  give  any  promise  of  salvation.  The  office  of  the  Law  was 
one  of  judgment,  even  with  regard  to  good  works,  i.  e.,  to  damnation. 
AgTicola  denied  the  significance  of  the  Law  unto  salvation,  but  ac- 
knowledged its  significance  per  se  and  stated  that  it  was  incapable  of 
producing  salvation  because  of  sin  which  prevents  men  from  keeping 
the  Law.  Poach  said  that  even  if  the  Pall  had  not  taken  place,  still 
the  keeping  of  the  Law  would  not  have  possessed  any  significance 
relative  to  salvation.  Otto  vox  Nordhau.sex  carried  Antinomianism 
to  its  culmination,  stating  that  it  Is  most  profitable  for  the  Christian 
to  know  nothing  of  the  Law.  Christians  are  not  to  be  tormented  with 
the  Law,  whose  didactic  significance  he  rejected.  Christians  are  in- 
capable of  sinning  and  are  ajjove  the  Law.  He  denied  that  the  Gospel 
demands  good  works  as  an  evidence  of  faith.  The  Formula  of  Concord 
sets  forth  the  difference  between  the  Law  and  the  Gospel.  When 
pcEnltentia  is  viewed  in  Its  restricted  sense,  then  the  Law'  is  concio 
poenitentiae.  Only  when  viewed  in  its  broad  sense  may  the  Gospel  be 
included,  but  In  that  case  the  Gospel  does  not  exercise  an  opus  pro- 
prium,  but  an  opus  allenum.  Properly  speaking,  therefore,  the  Gospel 
should  not  be  called  concio  poenitentise.  The  threefold  use  of  the  Law 
is  set  forth,  in  which  the  tertlus  usus  legls  is  especially  emphasized, 
thereby  answering  the  question  as  to  how  the  believer  can  at  once  be 
free  from  the  Law,  and  yet  be  bound  by  it.  In  his  work  "Das  Gnaden- 
reich"  of  the  year  1621,  Rathman  taught  that  the  Word  did  not  possess 
any  Indwelling  power,  but  was  eflScacious  only  through  the  operation 
of  the  Holy  Spirit.  It  possessed  no  power  either  before  or  after  being 
used.  It  was  like  an  ax,  which  becomes  efficacious  only  In  the  hands 
of  the  wood-chopper.  The  Socinians  said  that  the  power  and  efficacy 
of  the  Word  was  natural.  The  Arminians  separated  the  power  of  the 
Spirit  from  the  Word  and  ascribed  the  power  of  the  Word  of  God  to 
authority. 

Rationalism  set  forth  merely  the  natural  power  and  efficacy  of  the 
Word.  The  Sjiprnnaturali.sts  ascribed  the  power  of  the  Word  to  its 
inspiration  and  therefore  its  authority.  The  mediating  theologians 
did  not  have  a  correct  conception  of  the  power  and  efficacy  of  the  Word, 
and  several  confused  the  Law  and  the  Gospel.  Nitzrch  taught  that 
the  Gospel  produces  true  repentance.  Of  course,  the  orthodox  theo- 
logians support  the  symbolic  and  old  dogmatic  position.  Gez.  von 
SciiÉELK  expresses  himself  as  follows:*  "Inasmuch  as  the  Spirit  dwells 

*  Symbolik,  p.  303. 


THE  WOIU)  OF   COD  AS   A   ilEANS  OF   GKACE.  413 

in  the  Word,  therefore  it  can  illumine,  regenerate  and  sanctify.  With 
regard  to  the  manner  in  which  the  Holy  Spirit  operates  through  the 
Word  the  Lutheran  Church  does  not  conceive  of  this  as  taking  place 
merely  through  reflection.  Rather  the  Spirit  of  God  is  conceived  of 
as  being  personally  present  in  the  Word.  The  activity  of  the  Spirit  by 
means  of  the  Word  is  also  of  a  personal  character,  otherwise  the  effects 
produced  upon  the  individual  could  not  be  so  perfectly  adapted  as 
they  are.  The  one-sided  conception  of  those  who  overemphasize  the 
real  presence  of  the  divine  Spirit  in  the  Word,  even  when  it  is  not 
used,  or  where  it  is  not  understood  by  those  who  hear  and  read  it, 
has  no  support  in  the  Confessions  of  our  Church;  and  yet  the  Spirit 
is,  so  to  speak,  potentially  present  in  the  Word,  always  ready,  as  the 
angel  at  the  pool  of  Bethesda  (who  nevertheless  descended  only  at 
certain  times),  to  heal  those  who  enter  into  the  life-giving  waters." 
Billing*  sets  forth  the  teachings  of  the  Confessions  concerning  the 
Word  of  God  in  the  following  points:  "1)  The  Word  of  God  is  a  means 
of  grace  by  which  God  operates  and  does  all  that  is  necessary  for  the 
sanctiflcation  and  the  salvation  of  the  soul  of  man.  Through  the  same 
means  the  Church  is  built  and  her  life  sanctified.  2)  The  Word 
operates  not  only  through  its  logical  and  moral  influence,  but  through 
the  indwelling  presence  of  Christ  and  the  Holy  Spirit,  who  are  given 
unto  the  children  of  men.  3)  This  is  the  character  of  the  Word  of 
God  as  a  means  of  grace,  no  matter  in  what  form  it  may  be  used, 
whether  it  be  preached  or  heard,  whether  it  be  read  or  recalled  in 
memory.  The  question  as  to  whether  the  Word  possesses  this  power 
extra  usum  is  not  discussed  in  the  Confessions."  Dr.  H.  E.  Jacobs 
says:**  "It  must,  however,  be  always  borne  in  mind  that  the  efficacy 
belongs  to  the  truth  conveyed,  and  not  to  the  words  themselves.  This 
truth  is  just  as  efficacious,  if  expressed  in  other  words.  More  children 
of  God  have  been  converted  and  been  nourished  in  the  divine  life  by 
the  use  of  translations,  than  by  that  of  the  original  texts  of  Scripture. 
—  Nor  even  does  the  efficacy  of  the  Word  depend  upon  man's  faith. 
Faith  is  always  necessary  to  the  reception  of  the  efficacy,  but  not  to 
its  presence.  There  is  no  lack  of  efficacy  in  the  medicine  which  is  not 
taken  by  the  patient.  If  his  symptoms  grow  worse,  he  could  not  tell 
his  physician  that  there  was  no  efficacy  in  the  prescription.  All  the 
while  that  the  wheat  was  covered  by  the  cerements  of  the  mummy 
with  which  it  was  buried,  its  efficacy  was  not  lost.  Thousands  of  years 
elapsed,  and  when  placed  in  relations  more  favorable  to  its  develop- 
ment, it  was  proved  to  have  been  present.  If  it  had  died  after  a 
thousand  years,  and  never  been  placed  where  it  could  sprout,  this 
would  not  have  proved  any  lack  of  efficacy  during  that  millennium. 
It   is   not   ground   and    moisture   and   sunlight   that   give   the   seed   its 

*  Lutherska  kyrkans  bekännelse,  p.  317. 
**  Elements  of  Religion,  pp.  151,  154. 


414  ECCLKSIOLO(iY. 

vitality  and  efficacy.  We  find  these  in  an  inner  principle,  which,  how- 
ever, requires  for  its  exercise  such  external  conditions.  So  the  efficacy 
of  the  Word  depends  upon  the  abiding  presence  of  the  Spirit  within 
it,  as  a  life-force,  which,  however,  is  not  operative  in  the  application 
of  redemption  and  the  salvation  of  men,  unless  it  secure  lodgment  in 
m,an's  heart,  and  be  cherished  there." 


§36.    THE  SACRAMENTS. 

The  Word  and  the  Sacraments  are  internally  related,  in- 
asmuch as  it  is  the  Word  of  God  that  makes  the  Sacraments 
means  of  grace.  It  is  through  the  connection  with  the  Word 
of  God  that  the  water  in  Baptism  becomes  a  gracious  water 
of  life,  while  it  is  the  words  of  the  institution  that  make 
the  bread  and  the  wine  vehicles  of  the  sacramental  gift  of 
grace  in  the  Holy  Supper.  An  old  Latin  sentence  puts  it 
this  way:  "Verbum  accedit  ad  elementum  et  fit  sacramen- 
tum."  The  Word  is  verbum  andibile  and  the  Sacrament  is 
verbum  visibile. 

1.    Definition  of  Sacrament. 

A  SACRAMENT  is  a  holij  act  iristituted  by  God,  in  which 
visible  arid  earthly  means,  through  the  Word  of  God,  become 
vehicles  of  invisible  and  heavenly  gifts  of  grace,  ivhich  are 
imparted  to  all  participants,  but  whose  blessing  is  dependent 
on  the  subjective  state  of  the  participants.  HOLLAZius  de- 
fines as  follows:*  "A  sacrament  is  a  holy  and  solemn  rite, 
divinely  instituted,  by  which  God,  through  the  mediation  of 
human  servants,  by  means  of  an  external  and  visible  ele- 
ment in  connection  with  the  words  of  the  institution,  dis- 
penses heavenly  gifts  to  the  individuals  using  the  sacra- 
ment, in  order  to  offer  to  all  men  and  to  apply  and  seal  to 
the  believers  the  grace  of  the  Gospel." 

Since  man  possesses  not  only  a  spiritual  personal  life, 
but,  as  a  physical  being,  also  a  natural  disposition,  there 
was  need  of  a  more  palpable  presentation  of  the  gifts  of 
salvation  than  that  which  occurs  in  the  Word.  In  the 
Sacrament   the    Lord    makes   use    of   visible    means   as    a 

*  Exam.  Theol.  Acroam.    Pars  III,  §1,  Cap.  in. 


THE  SACRAMENTS.   '  415 

vehicle  of  His  grace.  Absolution  may  also  be  considered 
especially  as  an  applicable  and  cognizable  means,  but  the 
visible  element  is  nevertheless  wanting. 

The  Sacraments  are  necessary  because  the  Lord  has  in- 
stituted them  and  through  them  dispenses  special  gifts, 
Of  course,  they  are  not  necessary  in  the  absolute  sense,  but 
they  are  ordinata  in  a  relative  sense.  If  any  distinction 
were  to  be  drawn  between  the  Sacraments,  then  Baptism 
must  be  considered  more  necessary  than  the  Lord's  Supper, 
because  it  is  the  Sacrament  of  regeneration.  Both  are, 
however,  necessary  and  have  their  special  purpose. 

The  Sacraments  are  distinguished  by  the  following  char- 
acteristics :  1)  the  visible  elements  which  God  has  ordained ; 
2)  the  divine  command  to  use  these  elements  in  accordance 
with  the  institution;  3)  the  divine  words  and  promises 
which  set  forth  that  the  visible  elements  are  vehicles  of 
special  gifts;  4)  the  Sacraments  must  be  rightly  adminis- 
tered and  used  in  accordance  with  the  Word  of  God. 

2.  The  Forma  et  Materia  of  the  Sacraments. 
Forma  sacramenti  consists  of  the  following  parts:  1) 
consecratio,  which  takes  place  through  the  reading  of  the 
words  of  the  institution,  by  which  the  elements  are  set  apart 
for  a  holy  purpose.  This  consecration  does  not  involve  any 
special  magical  power  dependent  on  the  character  or  state  of 
mind  of  the  officiating  priest  or  minister.  Nor  is  there  any 
secret  power  in  the  sound  of  the  words,  nor  in  their  num- 
ber. The  elements  are  not  transformed,  but  simply  conse-^ 
crated  as  vehicles  of  the  gifts  of  grace.  The  minister  ec- 
clesiae  consecrates,  but  the  Sacrament  is  not  dependent  on 
his  spiritual  character  or  frame  of  mind;  all  that  is  neces- 
sary it  that  he  strictly  follows  the  command  and  institution 
of  Christ;  2)  dispensatio,  since  the  Sacrament  must  be 
dispensed.  Baptism  would  not  be  a  baptism  unless  someone 
were  baptized;  neither  would  the  Lord's  Supper  be  such, 
save  as  the  elements  are  distributed.  In  the  Sacrament  of 
the  Lord's  Supper  both  elements  must  be  dispensed;  3) 
receptio,  inasmuch  as  the  elements  must  be  received. 


416  ECCLESIOLOGY. 

Materia  sacramenti  is  res  terrestris  et  res  celestis.  Res 
terrestris  in  Baptism  is  pure  water.  Nothing  else  can  be 
substituted.  Res  terrestris  in  the  Lord's  Supper  is  bread 
and  real  wine  of  the  grape.  Neither  may  there  be  any 
substitution  in  this  Sacrament,  and  both  elements  must  be 
consecrated,  distributed  and  received.  Res  celestis  in  each 
Sacrament  is  the  special  gift  which  the  Lord  has  promised- 
Opinions  are  divided  with  regard  to  res  celestis  in  Baptism 
but  in  the  Lord's  Supper  res  celestis  is  the  real  body  and 
blood  of  Christ  and  there  is  no  dispute  among  confessional 
theologians  concerning  this  matter.  Read  further  on  Bap- 
tism and  the  Lord's  Supper  in  the  following  sections. 

3.    The  Effects  of  the  Sacraments. 

As  has  already  been  mentioned  in  the  discussion  of  the 
means  of  grace,  the  Sacraments  are  not  operative  ex  opere 
operato;  their  blessed  and  saving  efficacy  is  conditioned  by 
the  faith  of  the  recipient.  Res  celestis  is  indeed  dispensed 
to  all,  but  it  is  efficacious  unto  salvation  only  to  believers. 
The  heavenly  element  also  serves  to  confirm  the  believers. 
The  Sacraments  likewise  have  external  significance  and 
constitute  signs  of  confession.  Their  principal  effect,  how- 
ever, is  spiritual. 

When  viewed  as  a  verbum  visibile  it  might  seem  as  though 
the  effect  of  the  Word  and  the  Sacraments  were  the  same 
For  this  reason  the  Apology  says :  "Quare  idem  est  utriusque 
,effectus."  But  the  Apology  sets  this  forth  from  the  point  of 
view  of  the  doctrine  of  justification.  Both  the  Word  and 
the  Sacraments  work  faith  and  justification.  The  Lutheran 
Church  must  emphasize  the  importance  of  the  Word  as  over 
against  the  position  of  the  Catholic  Church  in  order  that 
the  Word  may  not  be  placed  in  a  subordinate  position  to 
the  Sacraments.  On  the  other  hand,  the  Lutheran  Church 
must  likewise  stress  the  significance  of  the  Sacraments  as 
against  the  position  of  the  Reformed  Church  and  therefore 
set  forth  fully  the  special  gifts  of  grace  dispensed  in  the 
Sacraments. 


THE   SACRAJIENTS.  417 

4.    Notes  on  the  History  of  Dogma. 

The  term  ''sacrament"  was  variously  understood  in  the 
early  Church.  The  incarnation,  the  death  of  Christ,  indeed, 
Christianity  itself,  were  called  sacraments.  The  word  arose 
from  the  Vulgate  translation  of  /xvarypLov.  Many  of  the 
Church  Fathers,  although  they  considered  Baptism  and  the 
Lord's  Supper  as  the  real  Sacraments,  nevertheless  counted 
many  of  the  sacred  acts  of  the  Church  as  Sacraments.  The 
Catholic  doctrine  of  the  Sacraments  was  established  as  early 
as  the  Polemical  period,  but  was  developed  more  especially 
during  the  Scholastic  period.  The  number  of  the  Sacra- 
ments was  fixed  by  Otto  of  Bamberg  at  seven.  Peter  Lom- 
bard determined  their  order.  The  seven  Sacraments  were 
the  following:  Baptism,  confirmation,  the  Lord's  Supper, 
penance,  extreme  unction,  ordination  and  marriage.  Ordi- 
nation was  regarded  as  the  fundamental  Sacrament,  and 
great  stress  was  laid  on  the  intention  of  the  officiating 
priest.  The  Protestants  decided,  in  accordance  with  the 
Word  of  God,  that  the  Sacraments  are  only  two.  They 
rejected  the  Catholic  doctrine  of  the  efficacy  of  the  Sacra- 
ments ex  opere  operato,  also  that  of  intention,  etc.  But  the 
Lutheran  Church,  which  represents  the  conservative  Ref- 
ormation, adopted  a  sound  historical  view  in  its  doctrine  of 
the  Sacraments  and  was  not  carried  to  the  extremes  that 
characterized  the  Reformed  Protestantism.  The  Reformed 
doctrine  of  the  Sacraments  suffers  from  the  same  fault  as 
their  doctrine  of  the  Word.  They  retained  the  shell  and 
threw  away  the  kernel.  Within  the  Reformed  Church  there 
are  to  be  found  variants  of  the  doctrines  of  Zwingli  and 
Calvin  concerning  the  Sacraments,  some  even  approaching 
the  Lutheran  position,  but  there  is  no  denomination  within 
the  Reformed  Church  that  has  adopted  the  Biblical  doctrine 
which  our  Church  has  set  forth.  Several  of  the  modern 
Lutheran  theologians  distinguish  between  the  efficacy  of 
the  Sacraments  and  the  Word,  stating  that  the  former  is 
efficacious  especially  in  relation  to  man's  human  nature, 
while  the  Word  appeals  more  directly  to  his  spiritual  person- 


418  ECCI.ESIOLOGY. 

ality.  In  the  interest  of  Apologetics  many  Lutheran  theo- 
logians have  in  recent  times  made  powerful  contributions 
in  the  presentation  and  defense  of  the  Lutheran  doctrine  of 
the  Lord's  Supper. 

Justin  Mabtyk  held  that  there  were  two  Sacraments,  which  he  set 
forth  as  the  two  set  ways  in  which  man  entered  into  relationship  with 
God.  Teuti'llian  was  the  first  who  especially  made  use  of  the  word 
Sacrament  in  regard  to  Baptism  and  the  Lord's  Supper.  Cyphian  said 
that  the  Sacraments,  i.  e.,  external  signs  or  means  duly  consecrated, 
possess  immanent  and  efficacious  powers  unto  salvation.  He  empha- 
sized the  act  of  consecration  by  the  ordained  minister. 

Augusti. \E  set  forth  this  dictum:  verbum  accedit  ad  elementum  et 
fit  sacramentum.  Although  he  taught  that  Baptism  and  the  Lord's 
Supper  were  the  real  Sacraments,  still  he  used  the  same  term  for  the 
laying  on  of  hands,  ordination,  and  marriage.  Jeuo.me  called  penance 
a  secondary  means  of  rescue  for  fallen  sinners,  which  gave  rise  to  the 
fact  that  penance  was  established  as  a  Sacrament.  Isidore  ok  Seviixk 
made  the  positive  assertion  that  the  Sacraments  were  efficacious 
through  an  indwelling  divine  power.  John  of  DA>rAscus  speaks  only 
of  two  mysteries  or  Sacraments,  Baptism  and  the  Lord's  Supper. 

Peter  Lombard  and  others  taught  that  the  Sacraments  of  the  New 
Testament  bestow  salvation,  which  the  Sacraments  of  the  Old  Testa- 
ment merely  promised,  for  which  reason  it  is  stated  that  the  efficacy 
of  the  latter  was  dependent  on  the  subjective  state  of  the  recipient 
and  therefore  operated  ex  opere  operantis,  while  the  former  operated 
ex  opere  operato.  Both  Lombard  and  Alexander  of  Hales  taught 
that  an  absolute  and  conscious  intention  on  the  part  of  the  priest 
was  necessary  to  insure  the  validity  of  the  Sacrament.  Thomas 
Aquinas  stated  that  neither  the  officiating  priest  nor  the  recipient 
was  allowed  to  say  anything  contrary  to  the  intention  of  the  Church. 
Duns  Scotus  and  Gaukikl  Biel  taught  that  passivity  was  all  that 
was  necessary  for  the  beneficial  effect  of  the  Sacrament,  or  that  its 
efficacy  was  not  counteracted  by  any  mortal  sin.  The  order  of  the 
Sacraments  established  by  Lombard  was  confirmed  at  Florens  in 
1439.  As  has  already  been  stated,  ordination  was  held  to  be  funda- 
mental in  relation  to  the  other  Sacraments.  The  Sacrament  of  mar- 
riage was  considered  basic  for  the  moral  life  of  the  home  and  the  state. 
Confirmation  completed  the  grace  of  Baptism.  Its  principal  rite  was 
the  anointing  and  laying  on  of  hands.  The  Sacrament  of  extreme 
unction  does  not  dispense  forgiveness  for  gross  or  mortal  sins,  but 
only  for  peccata  venialia  et  reliquiae  peccatorum.  Practically  speak- 
ing, therefore,  penance  became  one  of  the  chief  Sacraments.  Private 
confession  was  first  ordered  by  Leo  the  Great.  In  1215  Innocent  III 
commanded  that  all  members  of  the  Church  must  make  private  con- 


THK   SACHAMEXTR.  419 

fession  at  least  once  a  year.  In  the  penance  of  the  early  Church  the 
pedagogical  Intent  was  a  prominent  feature,  but'  in  the  Catholic  Church 
penance  became  a  system  of  legal  discipline.  The  ecclesiastical  law 
was  tantamount  to  the  civil  law  in  the  Church  of  the  Middle  Ages, 
through  the  confessional.  Directions  for  the  practice  of  penitential 
discipline  are  given  in  various  Penitentials  or  Confessionals,  which, 
after  the  pattern  of  forensic  productions,  settle  the  amount  of  penal 
exactions  for  all  conceivable  sins  in  proportion  to  their  enormity,  the 
state  putting  its  civil  forces  at  the  disposal  of  the  Church  to  enforce 
judgment.  The  object  of  penance  was  to  cure  sin.  The  effect  of  the 
Sacrament  of  penance  was  to  save  souls  from  hell,  but  not  from  tem- 
poral punishments  and  purgatory.  The  means  used  in  relation  to  these 
were  the  satisfactions.  In  this  connection  arose  the  doctrine  of 
supererogation,  together  with  those  of  indulgence  and  masses  for  the 
dead.  In  this  way  contritio  came  to  have  a  subordinate  significance, 
while  the  importance  of  confessio  and  satisfactio  was  greatly  stressed. 
While  the  doctrine  of  absolution  was  set  forth  theoretically,  still  in 
practice  the  emphasis  was  laid  on  satisfactio.  The  Council  of  Trent 
and  the  Roman  Catholic  catechism  make  mention  of  absolution  merely 
in  passing.  Absolution  is  looked  upon  more  as  an  act  of  church  dis- 
cipline than  as  an  act  of  grace.  Penance  was  a  system  of  satisfactions 
for  sins  committed  after  Baptism,  the  satisfactions  consisting  in  deeds 
and  labores.  For  this  reason  penance  is  called  not  only  a  plank 
grasped  by  a  shipwrecked  man,  but  also  laboriosus  baptismus.  In  this 
way  auricular  confession  became  necessary  in  order  that  the  priest  as 
a  judge  might  absolve  from  and  impose  satisfactions. 

The  Lutheran  Chureh  sets  forth  absolution  as  the  principal  element 
in  confession,  which  is  called  privata  absolutio.  Private  confession 
is  retained  for  the  sake  of  absolution  and  in  order  to  provide  an  oppor- 
tunity for  instruction.  Absolution  is  not  regarded  as  being  distinct 
from  the  other  means  of  grace,  but  is  nevertheless  a  special  function 
of  the  power  of  the  keys.  By  this  power  application  of  the  Gospel  is 
made  upon  the  individual  and  ought  to  be  accepted  in  true  faith.  In 
his  Large  Catechism  Luther  calls  Baptism  sacramentum  poenitentiae. 
The  forgiveness  of  sins  granted  in  Baptism  remains  in  force  day  by 
day  in  relation  to  the  penitent  as  long  as  they  live.  Absolution  rests 
on  the  foundation  of  Baptism  and  is  an  application  of  the  forgiveness 
of  sins  conferred  in  Baptism.  The  Word  of  God  sets  forth  the  for- 
giveness of  sins  in  general,  but  in  absolution  there  is  a  personal  appli- 
cation of  this  grace  of  God,  which  reinstates  the  believer  in  the  grace 
of  Baptism  and  therefore  becomes  a  real  preparation  for  the  Holy 
Supper,  which  confirms  the  grace  of  God  already  received  and  confers 
new  grace.  The  Reformed  Church  teaches  that  private  confession  is 
unnecessary,  but  may  be  used  in  case  of  spiritual  need.  Absolution 
comprises  the  preaching  of  the  Gospel  together  with  church  discipline. 


420  ECCLESIOI.OOY. 

As  a  means  of  grace  absolution  is  tantamount  to  the  preaching  of  the 
Gospel.  The  specific  characteristic  of  absolution,  however,  consists  in 
an  act  of  discipline.  In  this  sense  the  Reformed  Church  approaches 
more  nearly  to  the  Catholic  Church  than  to  the  Lutheran.  Zwixgli 
viewed  the  Sacraments  as  signs.  C.xlvin  stated  that  they  were  the 
seals  of  the  grace  of  God,  but  he  denied  that  they  were  vehicles  of  the 
gifts  of  God's  grace.  The  Sacraments  do  not  possess  any  real  objective 
value.  The  theory  of  predestination,  of  course,  exerted  its  influence 
on  his  doctrine  of  the  Sacraments.  The  Socinians  view  the  Sacraments 
merely  as  symbols  of  confession.  The  Aj-minians  held  the  same  view. 
At  most  the  Sacraments  are  seals  of  the  grace  of  God. 

The  Rationalists  consider  the  Sacraments  merely  as  signs  and  cere- 
monies. The  mediating  theologians  incline  to  the  Reformed  view. 
SciiLEiEK.MACiiEK  Stated  that  the  Sacraments  constituted  a  means  where- 
by Christ  continued  His  high-priestly  activity,  maintaining  and 
strengthening  the  living  communion  between  Himself  and  the  Church. 
Martensen  says  that  Christ  was  the  Redeemer  not  only  of  the  soul 
and  spirit  of  man,  but  also  of  his  body,  for  which  reason  He  imparts 
Himself  sacramentally  not  only  in  a  spiritual  sense,  but  also  as  to  His 
glorified  humanity.  Ritschliatiisjn  values  the  Sacraments  merely  from 
the  ethical  point  of  view.  Through  Baptism  we  are  received  into  the 
communion  which  Christ  has  established,  while  the  Holy  Supper  serves 
to  strengthen  the  memory  of  the  historical  Christ,  whom  we  ought 
ethically  to  emulate.  Tiiomasius  states  that  the  Sacrament  makes  its 
appeal  to  the  natural  side  of  man,  affecting  directly  his  physico- 
spiritual  nature,  while  the  Word  of  God  is  eflScacious  more  particularly 
in  relation  to  the  spiritual  side  of  man  and  influencing  his  intellect 
and  will. 

§37.    BAPTISM. 

Baptism  occupies  the  first  place  among  the  Sacraments, 
because  it  is  the  sacramentum  initiationis  et  regenerationis, 
while  the  Lord's  Supper,  on  the  other  hand,  is  called  sacra- 
mentum confirmationis.  However,  this  designation  of  the 
Sacrament  of  the  Altar  does  not  set  forth  its  full  signifi- 
cance. 

Baptism  was  indeed  found  before  the  establishment  of 
the  Church.  John  made  use  of  Baptism  as  an  external 
point  of  contact  and  as  a  symbol  of  purification  preparatory 
to  the  conversion  which  he  had  been  commissioned  to 
preach.  However,  Baptism  was  in  fact  an  idea  of  Christ 
and  is  really  a  Christian  institution.     It  may  be  said  that 


BAPTISM.  421 

the  Baptism  of  John  was  the  connecting  link  between  the 
Old  Testament  Sacrament  of  initiation  and  the  New  Testa- 
ment Baptism  of  the  Spirit  and  therefore  preparatory  to 
the  Sacrament  which  was  actually  to  confer  what  the  Old 
Testament  could  merely  typify.  Christ  instituted  Baptism 
in  its  present  form  and  with  its  present  content  and  sig- 
nificance. 

1.    The  Definition  of  Baptism. 

Baptism  is  a  sacred  sacramental  act,  instituted  by 
Christ,  in  which  water,  connected  ivith  the  Woirl  of  God, 
on  the  basis  of  the  divine  promise,  becomes  a  vehicle  of  a 
special  grace  of  the  Holy  Spirit,  which  effects  the  forgive- 
ness of  sins  and  rege^ieration,  where  there  are  no  subjective 
hindrances.  HoLLAZius*  defines  as  follows:  "Baptism  is  a 
sacred  and  solemn  action,  divinely  instituted,  by  which  sin- 
ful men,  actually  born  and  living,  without  distinction  of  sex 
or  age,  are  washed  in  water  in  the  name  of  the  Father,  Son, 
and  Holy  Ghost,  that  by  washing  of  water  divine  grace, 
promised  in  the  Gospel,  may  be  applied,  conferred  upon, 
and  sealed  to  them."  Baier**  defines  as  follows:  ''Baptism 
may  be  defined  as  a  sacred  act,  instituted,  by  Christ,  by 
which  men  are  washed  with  water,  without  distinction  of 
sex  and  age,  in  the  name  of  the  Father,  Son,  and  Holy 
Ghost,  and  are  thus  regenerated  and  renewed,  that  they 
may  secure  eternal  life."  Causa  effidens  principalis  is 
Christ,  one  with  the  Father  and  the  Spirit.  Causa  impid- 
siva  interna  is  the  divine  goodness.  Causa  impulsiva  ex- 
terna is  the  merit  of  Christ.  Causa  efficiens  tnimis  princi- 
palis ordinarily  is  minister  ecclesiae  or  in  extreme  emer- 
gency laicus  aut  femina.  With  regard  to  baptism  per- 
formed by  heretics  our  Dogmaticians  say  that  they  are 
valid  if  administered  according  to  the  institution  of  Christ. 
Those  persons  commit  a  grave  error,  however,  who  seek 
the  services  of  heretics  when  an  orthodox  pastor  may  be 
secured. 

*  Exam  Theol.  Acroam,  Pars  III,  §2,  Cap.  iv,  p.  559. 
**  Baieri  Comp.,  Pars  III,  Cap.  X,  §xiii. 


422  Kcci.Ksioi.ocY. 

In  this  connection  we  desire  to  set  forth  the  differences 
between  the  Baptism  of  John  and  that  of  Jesus.  The  Bap- 
tism of  John  constituted  the  historical  background  for  the 
Baptism  of  Jesus  and  was  merged  into  the  latter.  In  the 
Baptism  of  John  the  subjective  element  was  indeed  to  be 
found,  but  it  lacked  the  objective  sacramental  power.  The 
Baptism  of  John  \vas  a  Baptism  in  water  unto  repentance, 
the  Baptism  of  Christ  was  a  spiritual  Baptism  unto  regen- 
eration. The  former  was  symbolical,  the  latter  was  a 
vehicle  of  the  heavenly  gift  of  grace.  When  Jesus  insti- 
tuted the  New  Testament  Baptism,  the  administration  of 
which  began  on  the  day  of  Pentecost,  the  real  birthday  of 
the  Church,  He  merged  the  Baptism  of  John  into  the  Chris- 
tian Baptism  and  bestowed  upon  it  the  fullness  of  the  New 
Testament  content.  Compare  Matt.  3:  11;  Luke  3:  16; 
John  1 :  33 ;  "John  answered,  saying  unto  them  all,  I  indeed 
baptize  you  with  water ;  but  there  cometh  he  that  is  mightier 
than  I,  the  latchet  of  whose  shoes  I  am  not  worthy  to  un- 
loose: he  shall  baptize  you  in  the  Holy  Spirit;"  Acts  11: 
16 ;  19 :  4,  5 :  "John  baptized  with  the  baptism  of  repent- 
ance, saying  unto  the  people  that  they  should  believe  on  him 
that  should  come  after  him,  that  is,  on  Jesus.  And  when 
they  heard  this,  they  were  baptized  into  the  name  of  the 
Lord  Jesus." 

2.    The  Necessity  of  Baptism. 

Our  Lutheran  Church  teaches  that  in  order  to  be  saved 
it  is  necessary  to  be  born  again  of  water  and  the  Holy 
Spirit.  Compare  John  3:  5,  together  with  the  Augsburg 
Confession,  Art.  II  and  IX.  However,  the  Church  teaches 
that  this  necessity  is  absolute  in  relation  to  the  work  of  the 
Spirit,  but  relative  in  relation  to  Baptism.  God  is  not  bound 
in  the  absolute  sense,  so  that  it  would  be  impossible  for 
Him  to  regenerate  without  Baptism,  but  Baptism  is  neces- 
sary for  us,  inasmuch  as  God  has  connected  His  promise 
with  the  Sacrament  and  has  imparted  to  us  no  other  word 
or  promise  upon  which  we  might  establish  any  other  doc- 
trine.    Regeneration   is  absolutely  necessary  for  all,  con- 


BAl'TISM,  423 

cerning  which,  in  connection  with  Baptism,  we  read  in  John 
3:5:  "Except  one  be  born  anew,  he  cannot  see  the  kingdom 
of  God."  Compare  Mark  16:  16.  It  is,  therefore,  perfectly 
plain  and  clear  that  Baptism  is  necessary.  If  God  makes 
justifiable  exceptions,  these  do  not  justify  us  in  not  adhering 
to  the  rule.  We  are  safe  in  following  the  clear  expressions 
of  the  Word  and  in  obeying  God's  commandment.  With 
regard  to  possible  exceptions  the  Lutheran  theologians 
make  the  following  declaration :  non  privatio  sed  contemtus 
sacramenti  damnat.  The  following  reasons  may  therefore 
be  advanced  as  showing  forth  the  necessity  of  Baptism : 
1)  Because  Baptism  has  been  instituted  by  God,  for  whicli 
reason  no  one  can  be  saved  who  frivolously  neglects  or 
despises  the  Sacrament;  2)  because  all  men  are  born  with 
original  sin,  for  which  reason  all  men  need  the  saving  grace 
which  is  dispensed  in  Baptism;  3)  because  Baptism  is- 
sacramentum  regenerationis  and  that  without  regeneration 
no  man  can  be  saved;  4)  because  God  has  connected  the 
most  gracious  promises  with  the  sacrament  of  Baptism, 
which  cannot  be  replaced  by  any  virtue  or  merit  in  us,  not 
even  our  faith.  The  necessity  of  Baptism  takes  on  primary 
significance  in  relation  to  children,  inasmuch  as  they  cannot 
be  influenced  by  means  of  the  Word,  but  only  by  sacra- 
mentum regenerationis.  It  is  necessary  for  unbaptized 
adults  in  reaching  the  stage  of  true  faith  likewise  to  be 
baptized,  because  Baptism  completes  the  new  creation, 
strengthens  and  seals  it  with  the  Holy  Spirit  of  promise. 
In  the  case  of  the  person  who  has  fallen  away  from  the 
grace  of  Baptism  and  has  again  been  converted  to  the  Lord 
there  is  no  necessity  of  being  re-baptized,  inasmuch  as  the 
baptismal  covenant  on  the  Lord's  side  always  stands  secure 
In  the  case  of  a  person  baptized  in  unbelief  and  afterwards 
converted,  there  is  no  need  of  a  second  Baptism,  inasmuch 
as  his  first  Baptism  is  perfectly  valid,  although  his  sub- 
jective state  at  the  time  of  Baptism  made  him  non-receptive 
for  the  regenerating  grace  of  the  Sacrament.  Compare 
the  case  of  Simon  the  sorcerer,  Acts  8:  9 — 22.  Although 
it  is  stated  that  he  believed,  still  he  may  have  fallen,  because 


424  KCCLESIOLOGY. 

his  heart  was  not  right  before  God.  But  Peter  does  not 
speak  of  the  necessity  of  a  new  Baptism,  but  merely  ad- 
monishes him  to  repent  and  pray.  If  this  admonition  were 
heeded,  then  the  validity  of  the  sacramental  blessing  would 
still  be  in  force. 

3.    The  Elements  of  Baptism. 

The  elements  in  Baptism,  or  materiala  baptismi,  are: 
1)  materia  sen  res  terrestris,  or  pure  water,  which  is  not 
only  a  suitable  subjective  symbol  and  an  external  token  of 
a  spiritual  gift,  but  is  also  a  vehicle  of  the  gift,  or  the  means 
by  which  it  is  imparted;  2)  materia  sen  res  celestis,  which 
is  the  Holy  Spirit,  who  is  bestowed  for  the  holy  purposes 
of  the  Sacrament.  The  normal,  but  not  necessary,  result  of 
the  impartation  of  the  Spirit  is  regeneration,  depending  on 
the  subjective  state  of  the  baptized.  The  impartation  of 
the  Spirit  in  this  case  is  sacramental.  For  this  reason  the 
Dogmaticians  speak  of  nnio  sacramentalis  and  this  is  set 
forth  as  being  realis  et  exhibitiva,  which  means  that  the 
heavenly  gift  is  truly  and  really  present.  Dogmaticians 
entertain  divergent  views  concerning  materia  celestis.  Com- 
pare the  History  of  Dogma.  Some  have  declared  that  the 
gift  is  comprised  of  the  entire  Trinity,  but  they  qualify  the 
statement  by  adding,  peculiariter  et  determinative,  the  Holy 
Spirit.  The  Biblical  foundation  for  this  view  concerning 
the  entire  Trinity  is  the  expression  in  the  words  of  the 
institution,  viz.,  that  Baptism  takes  place  into  the  name  of 
the  Father,  and  of  the  Son,  and  of  the  Holy  Spirit.  The 
following  passages  are  quoted  to  prove  that  the  materia 
celestis  is  the  Holy  Spirit:  "Water  and  the  Spirit"  (John 
3:5);  "The  same  is  he  that  baptizeth  in  the  Holy  Spirit" 
(John  1 :  33)  ;  "Be  baptized^  every  one  of  you,  in  the  name 
of  Jesus  Christ  unto  the  remission  of  your  sins;  and  ye 
shall  receive  the  gift  of  the  Holy  Spirit"  (Acts  2:  38)  ; 
"For  in  one  Spirit  were  we  all  baptized"  (1  Cor.  12:  13)  ; 
"The  washing  of  regeneration  and  renewing  of  the  Holy 
Spirit"  (Titus  3:  5).  Some  have  objected,  stating  that 
Cornelius  received  the  Holy  Spirit  before  he  was  baptized. 


BAPTISM.  425 

Cf.  Acts  10 :  47,  48.  However,  this  was  part  of  the  extra- 
ordinary outpouring  of  the  Spirit  that  prevailed  at  the  time 
and  in  no  wise  hindered  CorneHus  from  receiving  in  his 
Baptism  the  special  gift  of  the  Spirit  unto  the  newness  of 
life  which  all  receive  in  Baptism.  Baptism  may  therefore 
be  called  the  Sacrament  of  the  Spirit,  because  there  is  a 
communion  of  the  Spirit,  just  as  in  the  Lord's  Supper  there 
occurs  a  communion  of  the  body  and  blood  of  Christ.  Bap- 
tism is  therefore  not  only  water,  but  a  water  of  God,  as 
Luther  says  in  his  large  Catechism,  and  confers  a  gift  upon 
all  that  are  baptized,  although  the  sacramental  blessing  is 
dependent  on  the  subjective  state  or  condition  of  the  recip- 
ient. When  this  required  condition  exists  or  is  realized, 
then  the  sacramental  power  and  gift  is  there  and  the  pur- 
pose of  Baptism  is  fulfilled. 

4.    The  Formale  or  Modus  of  Baptism. 

Formate  baptismi,  or  the  essential  form  and  mode  of 
Baptism,  consists  in  baptizing  with  water  into  the  name  of 
the  Father,  and  of  the  Son,  and  of  the  Holy  Spirit.  The 
words  of  the  institution  ought  to  be  read.  In  comparing 
Acts  8:  16  and  10:  48  it  would  appear  that  Baptism  was 
administered  in  the  name  of  Jesus,  but  these  passages  do 
not  deal  with  the  mode  of  Baptism,  but  merely  set  forth 
the  purpose  of  Baptism  as  a  Baptism  into  Christ.  Baptism 
may  be  administered  either  by  pouring,  sprinkling  or  im- 
mersion, but  the  Lutheran  Church  does  not  make  use  of  the 
last-mentioned  method,  inasmuch  as  this  would  constitute 
a  concession  to  those  who  insist  on  the  necessity  of  immer- 
sion. The  denominations  that  maintain  that  pouring  is  just 
as  correct  a  mode  of  baptizing  as  immersion  stand  on  secure 
ground  philologically.  Biblically  and  traditionally.  The 
Greek  word  (SairT^^ca  comes  from  fSd-n-To},  which  means  not 
only  to  dip,  to  dip  in  dye,  but  also  to  wash,  to  pump  water, 
to  moisten,  to  besprinkle.  These  are  the  translations  of 
/SaTTTw  given  by  distinguished  lexicographers.  We  would 
cite  some  Scripture  passages  where  (So^vtw  is  used.  Compare 
Lev.  14 :  4 — 6.    The  Septuagint  translates  the  Hebrew  word 


426  kcci.ksioi.ogV. 

tabhal  by  /Juttto».  Despite  the  fact  that  Furst  translate? 
tabhal  by  bedew,  moisten,  besprinkle  and  immerse,  still  the 
context  in  this  passage  clearly  shows  that  tabhal  and  fia-n-Tw 
could  not  mean  immerse,  inasmuch  as  it  would  be  physically 
impossible  to  immerse  the  bird,  the  cedar  wood,  the  scarlet, 
and  the  hyssop  in  the  blood  of  a  single  bird.  In  Daniel  5 : 
21  we  read  of  Nebuchadnezzar  that  his  body  was  wet  with 
the  dew  of  heaven.  Here  /^d-n-Tu,  is  used  and  refers  to  the 
dew  of  heaven  and  not  to  any  immersion.  Luther  translates 
(SdiTTU)  in  Rev.  19:  13  with  sprinkle.  This  translation  cor- 
responds to  the  Syrian,  Ethiopian  and  other  translations 
together  with  that  of  Origen.  This  passage  refers  to  Isa. 
63:  2,  3,  and  for  this  reason  we  cannot  possibly  think  of 
immersion.  Buttt/^co  is  likewise  translated  by  distinguished 
lexicographers  not  only  dip  and  immerse,  but  also  wash, 
pour  out  upon,  besprinkle,  etc.  An  investigation  of  the 
passages  in  which  (ia-n-r^^M  occurs  in  the  Septuagint  will 
plainly  show  that  it  may  be  translated  to  wash,  to  pour  out 
upon.  Compare  2  Kings  5:  14  and  Isa.  21:  4.  Most  con- 
vincing, however,  is  the  use  of  /JaTm'^w  in  the  New  Testa- 
ment. BaTTTt^w  occurs  about  seventy-five  times,  and  in  many 
of  these  passages  reference  is  made  to  the  washing  and 
cleansing  prescribed  by  the  Law  of  Moses.  Compare  the 
following  Scripture  passages :  "When  they  come  from  the 
market-place,  except  they  bathe  themselves,  they  eat  not; 
and  many  other  things  there  are,  which  they  have  received 
to  hold,  washings  of  cups,  and  pots,  and  brasen  vessels" 
(Mark  7:4);  "Now  there  were  six  waterpots  of  stone  set 
there  after  the  Jews'  manner  of  purifying,  containing  two 
or  three  firkins  apiece"  (John  2 :  6) .  The  letter  to  the 
Hebrews  (Heb.  9:  10)  calls  these  divers  washings  (iaiTTtafxol 
This  proves  that  baptize  and  immerse  are  not  identical  in 
meaning.  In  John  3 :  25  reference  is  made  to  a  questioning 
that  arose  with  regard  to  purifying,  while  the  whole  con- 
text of  the  passage  refers  to  Baptism.  Also  compare  John 
1 :  19 — 25,  and  especially  the  words,  "Why  then  baptizes! 
thou,  if  thou  art  not  the  Christ,  neither  Elijah,  neither  the 
prophet?    John  answered  them,  saying,  I  baptize  in  water." 


BAPTISM,  427 

Did  the  question  concern  immersion  and  was  it  foretold 
that  both  the  forerunner  and  Christ  Himself  were  to  bap- 
tize by  means  of  immersion?  Read  Mai.  3:  1 — 3:  "He  will 
purify  the  sons  of  Levi,  and  refine  them  as  gold  and  silver." 
Baptism  was  therefore  regarded  as  a  cleansing,  a  purifica- 
tion. Furthermore,  it  is  not  certain  that  baptism  in  water 
is  the  same  as  immersion  in  water.  Did  not  John  say  that 
he  baptized  with  water,  but  that  Christ  would  baptize  with 
the  Holy  Spirit?  This  Baptism  occurred  for  the  first  time 
on  the  day  of  Pentecost.  Peter  says  of  this  Baptism  that 
it  consisted  in  the  pouring  out  of  the  Holy  Spirit.  Compare 
Acts  2  :  17,  18 ;  10  :  44 ;  Titus  3  :  6.  This  Baptism  with  the 
Spirit  bears  testimony  in  favor  of  pouring  and  not  immer- 
sion. Even  John  3 :  23  does  not  constitute  a  signal  proof 
for  immersion,  inasmuch  as  vSara  TroXXa  means  many  streams^ 
and  in  any  case  the  original  text  does  not  necessarily  prove 
that  "much  water"  implies  that  the  water  was  as  deep  as 
was  required  for  immersion.  If  John  had  wished  to  baptize 
in  deep  water  he  might  indeed  have  continued  to  baptize  in 
Jordan,  but  many  proofs  can  be  cited  to  demonstrate  that 
he  also  baptized  by  means  of  pouring.  The  coming  up  out 
of  the  water  does  not  necessarily  mean  that  immersion  had 
taken  place,  since  they  might  just  as  well  have  stood  in  the 
water  during  the  process  of  pouring  and  still  come  up  out 
of  the  water  at  the  conclusion  of  the  act.  The  first  act  of 
Christian  Baptism  in  the  real  sense  was  performed  on  the 
first  Christian  day  of  Pentecost  when  3,000  persons  were 
baptized.  It  is  hardly  possible  that  all  these  were  baptized 
by  immersion.  This  could  not  have  taken  place  either  in 
Bethesda,  Siloam  or  the  Kidron.  In  consideration  of  the 
circumstances  in  the  case  it  is  hardly  possible  to  conceive 
of  the  Apostles  arranging  for  great  receptacles  to  immerse 
so  large  a  number.  The  Ethiopian  eunuch  was  very  cer- 
tainly baptized  by  means  of  pouring,  since  competent 
judges,  such  as  Eusebius,  have  proved  that  there  ^yas  not 
sufficient  water  for  immersion  in  the  place  where  the  bap- 
tism occurred.  The  coming  up  out  of  the  water  does  not 
prove  that  the   eunuch  had  been   under  the   water,   since 


428  ECCLESIOLOGY. 

Philip  also  came  up  out  of  the  water.  Compare  Acts  9 :  17 
19  concerning  the  Baptism  of  Paul.  In  1  Cor.  10:  1,  2  it  is 
stated  that  the  Israelites  were  all  baptized  in  the  cloud  and 
in  the  sea,  but  a  careful  examination  of  the  passage  will 
show  that  the  Baptism  did  not  take  place  by  means  of  im- 
mersion, but  by  sprinkling  from  the  cloud  and  the  sea, 
while  the  Egyptians  were  swallowed  up  by  the  waters  that 
were  closed  on  them  and  were  drowned.  Compare  1  Peter 
3 :  20,  where  it  is  stated  that  eight  souls  were  saved  through 
water,  but  who  would  say  that  they  were  immersed?  Nei- 
ther Rom.  6:  4  nor  Col.  2:  12  constitutes  a  proof  for  im- 
mersion, inasmuch  as  these  passages  set  forth  the  signifi- 
cance of  Baptism  and  do  not  determine  its  method.  From 
the  passages  quoted  together  with  others  it  is  plainly  evi- 
dent that  the  meaning  of  /SaTrTitw  is  not  limited  to  dip  or 
immerse,  but  that  the  verb  also  means  to  pour  out  upon, 
to  wash,  to  besprinkle,  et  cetera.  Inasmuch,  therefore,  as 
)8a7rrttw  possesses  B,  special  significance,  which  is  neverthe- 
less not  limited,  therefore  the  Lutheran  Church  acknowl- 
edges all  three  modes  of  Baptism.  In  this  as  in  many  other 
instances,  however,  she  takes  a  mediating  position  and  most 
generally  uses  the  mode  of  pouring  in  the  administration 
of  the  Sacrament  of  Baptism. 

5.  The  Subjects  of  Baptism. 
Finis  ciii  et  siibjectum  baptismi,  or  the  subjects  of 
Baptism,  are  not  only  adults,  but  also  children.  There  is 
no  argument  with  regard  to  the  Baptism  of  proselytes, 
which  takes  place  after  the  candidates  have  been  properly 
instructed  and  have  made  their  confession.  Our  specific 
interest  at  this  time  is  centered  about  the  Baptism  of  in- 
fants. The  position  of  the  Lutheran  Church  and  others 
that  children  ought  to  be  baptized  is  justified  by  the  words 
of  the  institution  of  Baptism,  which  do  not  make  mention 
of  grown  persons  any  more  than  of  children,  but  include 
both  in  the  command  :  "Make  disciples  of  all  nations"  (Matt. 
28:  19).  The  word  /xaor^revWre  implies  that  the  work  of  the 
Gospel  in  general  and  does  not  therefore  describe  an  ante- 


BAPTISM.  429 

cedent  and  completed  condition  for  Baptism.  Disciples  are 
made  through  Baptism  and  instruction.  No  one  is  a  true 
disciple  who  is  not  baptized.  It  is  indeed  significant  that 
in  the  words  of  the  institution  baptize  is  first  mentioned, 
followed  by  teaching,  which  fits  perfectly  the  condition  of 
the  child.  For  this  reason  it  always  has  been  and  is  now 
the  general  practice  to  baptize  children.  Most  Christians 
acknowledge  infant  Baptism.  If  children  were  to  be  ex- 
cluded from  the  New  Covenant,  how  inferior  this  would 
be  to  the  Old,  where  they  were  taken  up  into  communion 
with  the  Theocracy  at  the  age  of  eight  days?  Paul  sets 
forth  the  relationship  between  the  Sacraments  of  the  Old 
and  the  New  Covenant  in  the  following  passage :  "In  whom 
ye  were  also  circumcised  with  a  circumcision  not  made  with 
hands,  in  the  putting  off  of  the  body  of  flesh,  in  the  cir- 
cumcision of  Christ;  having  been  buried  with  him  in  bap- 
tism" (Col.  2:  11,  12).  When  the  Lord  through  circum- 
cision received  the  small  children  into  the  Covenant  of  the 
Law  without  their  own  choice  or  assent  or  faith,  how  can 
we  conceive  of  the  children  of  the  Covenant  of  Grace  en- 
joying fewer  privileges.  Indeed  their  privileges  are  greater. 
The  Lord  Jesus,  the  Founder  of  the  Church  and  the  Friend 
of  the  children,  has  clearly  set  forth  the  position  of  the 
children  in  the  kingdom  of  God.  Compare  Mark  10 :  14  and 
15.  .In  the  latter  verse  we  read:  "Verily  I  say  unto  you. 
Whosoever  shall  not  receive  the  kingdom  of  God  as  a  little 
child,  he  shall  in  no  wise  enter  therein."  Inasmuch  as  chil- 
dren are  set  forth  as  examples  in  regard  to  the  proper 
reception  of  the  kingdom,  ought  they  not  to  be  considered 
as  proper  subjects  for  Baptism  as  adults?  If  the  kingdom 
is  theirs,  ought  they  not  have  the  privilege  of  entering  in 
through  the  door  of  Baptism  in  order  that  they  may  ac- 
tually belong  to  the  kingdom?  The  Lord  desires  that  the 
children  should  come  to  Him,  and  the  Sacrament  of  Bap- 
tism is  the  only  way  by  which  they  may  come  and  receive 
the  blessing.  Normally  there  is  but  one  way  or  order  of 
salvation,  for  which  reason  Christ  has  not  instituted  Bap- 
tism for  adults  and  another  way  of  salvation  for  children. 


430  ECCLESIOLOGY. 

As  a  rule  the  following  words  apply  to  everybody :  "He  that 
believeth  and  is  baptized  shall  be  saved"    (Mark  16:   16) 
and  also:  "Except  one  be  born  of  water  and  the  Spirit,  he 
cannot  enter  into  the  kingdom  of  God"  (John  3:5). 

No  one  can  enter  into  heaven  that  has  not  been  regener- 
ated. The  children  must  therefore  be  born  again  in  order 
to  be  saved.  Inasmuch  as  the  infant  is  a  child  of  nature 
and  cannot  understand  the  Word,  therefore  the  Sacrament 
of  Baptism  is  the  only  revealed  means  by  which  children 
can  be  made  partakers  of  the  grace  of  salvation.  The 
ordinary  objection  has  always  been  that  children  cannot 
believe  and  that  Baptism  does  not  work  faith.  But  if  the 
Holy  Spirit  is  unable  to  effect  saving  faith  in  the  children, 
then  the  only  conclusion  is  that  the  baptized  children  must 
be  accounted  unbelievers  and  subject  to  condemnation,  in- 
asmuch as  it  is  impossible  for  unbelievers  to  enter  into  the 
kingdom  of  Heaven.  Therefore  faith  must  be  effected  if 
children  are^  to  be  saved.  We  are  familiar  with  the  incon- 
sistent position  of  the  Baptists  that  the  children  are  in- 
capable of  faith  and  still  are  saved  without  faith.  To  be 
sure,  the  infant  stands  in  a  relation  to  the  saving  grace  of 
the  Spirit  different  from  that  of  the  adult,  inasmuch  as 
there  is  wanting  in  the  child  active  and  conscious  resistance 
to  the  operations  of  the  Spirit.  The  child  is  in  a  state  of 
passivity  which  makes  possible  the  successful  work  of  the 
Spirit.  Through  Baptism  the  grace  of  God  is  bestowed 
upon  the  child  and  eifects  a  fides  directa,  which  is  a  saving 
faith.  There  are  many  degrees  of  faith.  This  fides  directa 
is  not  a  finished  or  mature  faith  like  fides  reflexa,  but  as 
the  beginnings  of  the  fully  mature  man  are  found  in  the 
child,  so  is  also  faith  in  its  embryo  stage.  The  child  is  a 
real  child,  although  not  self-conscious ;  the  faith  of  the  child 
is  a  true  faith,  although  it  is  not  conscious  of  its  faith,  nor 
of  the  conception  of  faith.  Faith  is  the  work  of  the  Spirit, 
both  as  directa  and  reflexa.  Even  in  the  adult,  faith  in 
its  embryo  state  is  like  unto  a  tender  shoot  and  a  fides 
directa,  which  afterwards  develops  and  becomes  reflexa. 
As  the  children  grow  in  years,  so  they  develop  in  under- 


BAPTISM.  431 

standing  and  appropriate  ever-increasingly  the  gifts  of  God, 
provided  they  remain  faithful  to  their  baptismal  covenant. 
In  this  process  the  Word  of  God  must  be  used,  and  instruc- 
tion given.  The  Church  must  provide  for  the  instruction 
of  the  baptized  children.  An  analogy  to  the  faith  of  the 
child  has  been  sought  in  the  relationship  that  subsists  be- 
tween the  children  and  their  parents.  The  child  stretches 
forth  its  hands  to  its  mother,  and  yet  the  action  may  be 
wholly  unreflected.  In  the  same  way  the  child  is  drawn 
to  the  Lord  when  He  approaches  it  in  the  grace  of  Baptism. 
The  degree  or  state  of  faith  in  the  child  is  therefore  not  a 
conclusive  argument  against  infant  Baptism.  Furthermore, 
it  is  not  faith  that  makes  Baptism  a  means  of  grace.  As 
we  have  seen,  it  has  happened  in  the  Baptism  of  proselytes 
that  unbelievers  have  been  baptized,  but  the  Baptism  has 
nevertheless  possessed  its  significance  and  become  a  blessing 
to  them  in  their  conversion.  But  the  children  are  passive, 
and  the  Lord  works  in  them  faith,  which  is  receptive. 
Viewed  from  the  standpoint  of  receptivity,  faith  may  be 
found  even  in  a  state  of  unconsciousness.  Just  as  children 
may  be  the  possessors  of  enormous  wealth,  their  parents 
bestowing  great  gifts  upon  them,  which  for  the  time  being 
they  are  unable  to  appreciate,  so  God  is  able  to  dispense 
His  gracious  gifts  to  the  children.  With  regard  to  the 
divine  operations  in  infant  children,  yea,  while  yet  in  the 
womb,  compare  Jer.  1:  15  and  Luke  1:  15.  The  latter 
passage  reads :  "He  shall  be  filled  with  the  Holy  Spirit,  even 
from  his  mother's  womb."  Would  it  not  seem  possible  for 
the  same  Lord  to  bestow  His  Spirit  upon  the  infant  chil- 
dren through  Baptism?  We  may  be  certain  that  He  can. 
The  Lord  has  bestowed  His  Holy  Spirit  upon  those  that 
have  been  baptized  in  infancy  and  thereby  confirmed  their 
Baptism.  To  be  sure,  the  Bible  does  not  expressly  mention 
infant  Baptism,  but  children  are  not  excluded  in  the  pas- 
sages which  relate  to  Baptism.  Compare  Eph.  5:  25,  26. 
In  the  membership  of  the  Church  the  children  are  included, 
but  if  they  were  not  baptized  they  would  not  belong  to  the 
Church.     It  is  also  stated  that  whole  families  were  bap- 


4S2  ECCLESIOT.OCY. 

tized,  which  constitutes  a  proof  that  the  Apostles  also 
baptized  children,  since  it  is  hardly  to  be  assumed  that  all 
these  families  were  childless.  The  following  are  specially 
mentioned:  Cornelius  and  his  household  in  Acts  10:  47; 
Lydia  and  her  household  in  Acts  16:  15;  the  jailor  at 
Philippi  with  all  his  house  in  Acts  16 :  33 ;  Crispus  with  all 
his  house  in  Acts  IS:  8;  the  household  of  Stephanas  in  1 
Cor.  1:  16;  the  house  of  Onesiphorus  in  2  Tim.  4:  19;  the 
households  of  Aristobulus  and  Narcissus  in  Rom.  16:  10,  11. 
If  we  confine  ourselves  to  the  first  five  of  these  passages  it 
is  altogether  evident  that  the  children  also  were  baptized. 
OiKos,  translated  "house"  or  "household,"  is  an  expression 
which  implies  that  there  were  children  in  the  family  and 
not  only  servants. 

6.  The  Effect  and  Purpose  of  Baptism. 
Effectus  sen  finis  proximus  baptismi  is  regeneration  and 
renovation.  Of  course,  regeneration  presupposes  justifica- 
tion. We  need  hardly  remark  that  the  effect  of  Baptism 
does  not  take  place  ex  opere  operato,  i.  e.,  independent  of 
the  subjective  state  of  the  baptized.  However,  Baptism  is 
always  a  means  of  grace,  so  that  the  Holy  Spirit  is  imparted 
unto  regeneration,  which  takes  place  when  the  proper  sub- 
jective conditions  are  present.  Regeneration  takes  place 
always  in  infant  Baptism,  but  in  the  Baptism  administered 
to  a  proselyte  or  an  adult  it  may  happen  by  reason  of  the 
lack  of  faith  on  the  part  of  the  recipient  that  regeneration 
does  not  take  place,  but  when  faith  is  present  or  is  brought 
about  later,  then  Baptism  is  eflficacious  unto  regeneration. 
With  the  subjective  presuppositions  at  hand,  regeneration 
becomes  the  immediate  effect  of  the  administration  of  Bap- 
tism, which  is  indeed  the  normal  effect  of  this  Sacrament 
of  regeneration.  In  the  absence  of  the  subjective  prere- 
quisites regeneration  does  not  take  place,  but  a  sacramental 
connection  is  nevertheless  established.  God  has  a  grip,  so 
to  speak,  upon  the  baptized,  as  Gisle  Johnson  says.  In 
the  case  of  an  adult  the  subjective  prerequisites  may  be 
present  before  Baptism,  indeed,  some  time  before,  but  nor- 


I5APTISM.  43S 

mally  regeneration  is  made  complete  through  the  admin- 
istration of  the  Sacrament,  which  is  a  washing  of  regen- 
eration. Compare  Titus  3:5;  Heb.  10 :  22.  Regeneration 
is  effected  through  the  Holy  Spirit  by  means  of  Baptism 
and  the  Word  in  indissoluble  connection.  Cf .  Eph.  5 :  26 : 
"That  he  might  sanctify  it,  having  cleansed  it  by  the  wash- 
ing of  water  with  the  word."  Such  passages  as  1  Peter 
1 :  23 ;  James  1 :  18 ;  1  John  2 :  29  do  not  militate  against 
the  doctrine  that  regeneration  is  effected  through  the  co- 
operation of  Baptism  and  the  Word,  inasmuch  as  the  Word 
of  God  must  be  interpreted  according  to  the  analogy  of 
faith.  If  regeneration  is  effected  independently  of  Baptism, 
this  must  be  considered  as  God's  own  exception  to  the  rule, 
when  persons  through  no  fault  of  their  own  are  deprived 
of  the  Sacrament.  We  are  not  to  be  concerned  with  the 
exceptions;  it  is  our  duty  to  follow  the  rule.  In  the  case 
of  infant  Baptism  the  Word  is  present  in  the  words  of  the 
institution,  while  in  the  Baptism  of  adults  the  Word  has 
been  instrumental  in  preparing  the  candidate  for  the  ad- 
ministration of  the  Sacrament,  and  in  their  Baptism  the 
Word  is  connected  with  water.  As  the  baptized  children 
grow  up  they  are  to  be  instructed  in  the  Word.  Because 
of  the  fact  that  in  the  processes  of  conversion  and  regen- 
eration in  adults  the  Word  of  God  works  a  self-conscious 
choice,  therefore  it  has  been  customary  for  some  theologians 
to  call  infant  regeneration  the  basic,  principal,  and  potential 
regeneration.  And  this  is  true  when  we  consider  the  de- 
velopment of  the  spiritual  life,  but  it  is  not  to  be  construed 
to  mean  that  a  real  regeneration  has  not  taken  place.  In 
Baptism  a  new  birth  occurs.  A  spiritual  child  is  born  into 
the  world  of  the  Spirit,  which  shall  grow  up  and  mature, 
subject  to  the  conditions  of  this  earthly  life,  until  it  shall 
please  the  Lord  to  remove  such  a  person  to  the  life  which 
is  eternal.  The  normal  effect  of  Baptism,  therefore,  is 
regeneration.  This  necessarily  implies  that  Baptism  works 
forgiveness  of  sins.  Baptism  removes  the  guilt  of  original 
sin.  The  materiale  of  sin,  or  the  evil  desire,  to  be  sure, 
remains,  but  with  this  difference,  that  the  Holy  Spirit  be- 

Dogmatics.     15. 


434  ECCLESIOLOGY. 

gins  the  work  of  counteracting  this  desire.  The  blessed 
effects  of  Baptism  are  to  be  seen  in  the  whole  nature  of 
man,  both  material  and  spiritual.  It  affects  the  whole 
course  of  life,  Luther  says:  "Baptism  worketh  forgive- 
ness of  sins,  delivers  from  death  and  the  devil,  and  confers 
everlasting  salvation  on  all  who  believe  as  the  Word  and 
promise  of  God  declare."  This  is  particularly  evident  when 
we  reflect  on  the  new  relationship  of  the  baptized  person 
with  God,  who  becomes  his  true  Father,  Christ  his  personal 
Saviour  and  Brother,  and  the  Holy  Spirit  his  Comforter 
and  Sanctifier. 

The  following  passages  may  be  cited  and  considered: 
"And  Peter  said  unto  them.  Repent  ye,  and  be  baptized 
every  one  of  you  in  the  name  of  Jesus  Christ  unto  the  re- 
mission of  your  sins ;  and  ye  shall  receive  the  gift  of  the 
Holy  Spirit.  For  to  you  is  the  promise,  and  to  your  chil- 
dren" (Acts  2:  38,  39).  This  proves  that  Baptism  effects 
regeneration,  since  he  that  has  received  the  forgiveness  of 
sins  must  also  be  called  a  child  of  God.  Compare  once  more 
John  3 :  5  and  Titus  3 :  4,  6.  The  Baptists  say  that  the 
expression  "by  water"  means  spiritual  life.  But  this  is 
plainly  a  misinterpretation  of  Scripture.  There  is  much 
in  the  third  chapter  of  John  which  proves  that  the  subject 
of  Baptism  was  being  discussed.  Nicodemus  was  familiar 
with  the  work  of  John  the  Baptist.  The  whole  context 
proves  that  the  "water"  refers  to  Baptism.  If  water  is  used 
figuratively  in  this  connection,  then  Spirit  must  also  be  so 
used,  and  no  one  maintains  the  latter.  There  is  no  reason 
for  asserting  the  former.  Cf.  1  John  5 :  6 — 8.  Even  there 
Spirit  and  water  are  distinguished,  so  that  the  Spirit  is 
the  Holy  Spirit,  and  water  is  not  used  figuratively.  In  Titus 
we  read  of  the  "washing  of  regeneration"  instead  of  water, 
and  in  the  place  of  Spirit  we  read  Holy  Spirit  and  the  re- 
newing of  the  Holy  Spirit.  "Enter  into  the  kingdom"  is 
replaced  with  "He  saved  us."  Christ  and  Paul,  therefore, 
clearly  taught  that  Baptism  effects  regeneration.  In  Gal. 
3:  27  we  read:  "For  as  many  of  you  as  were  baptized  into 
Christ  did  put  on  Christ."    Compare  also  Acts  22:  16;  Col. 


BAPTISM.  435 

2:  11,  12  and  1  Peter  3:  20,  21.  This  last-named  passage 
reads  as  follows:  "Wherein  few,  that  is,  eight  souls,  were 
saved  through  water:  which  also  after  a  true  likeness  doth 
now  save  you,  even  baptism."  Concerning  the  significance 
of  Baptism  read  Rom.  6:  3,  4.  This  includes  new  life,  a 
new  creation,  and  new  conduct.  This  significance  of  Bap- 
tism presupposes  that  it  is  the  Sacrament  of  regeneration. 
If  the  baptized  person  remains  in  the  grace  of  Baptism,  or, 
having  fallen  from  the  grace  of  Baptism,  again  returns  to 
the  Lord  through  conversion  and  afterwards  abides  faith- 
fully by  the  Word  of  God  unto  the  end,  he  shall  become 
the  object  of  the  final  purpose  of  Baptism.  Finis  sen, 
effectus  tdtimus  is  the  eternal  salvation  of  the  baptized. 

7.  Notes  on  the  History  of  Dogma. 
The  early  Church  set  forth  Baptism  not  only  as  a  symbol, 
but  as  a  means  of  grace  unto  regeneration  and  salvation. 
The  validity  of  infant  Baptism  was  attested  as  an  apostolic 
tradition.  The  principle  of  freedom  ruled  in  regard  to  the 
mode  of  administering  the  Sacrament.  Immersion  was  not 
used  because  of  its  necessity,  but  as  a  more  complete  ex- 
pression of  the  idea  of  baptismal  purification.  The  sick 
were  baptized  by  means  of  pouring  or  sprinkling.  When 
this  method  was  called  in  question  and  persons  so  baptized 
were  called  clinici,  then  Cyprian  defended  this  mode  of 
Baptism.  In  one  form  or  another,  however,  the  usual 
method  of  administering  Baptism  was  by  immersion.  This 
immersion,  however,  did  not  always  take  place  in  the  ordi- 
nary manner,  but  in  many  cases  the  candidate  for  Baptism 
stood  in  the  water,  while  the  water  was  poured  over  him. 
The  Greek  Catholic  Church  still  retains  immersion,  although 
the  degrees  of  immersion  may  vary.  Pouring  is,  however, 
permissible  in  cases  of  necessity,  as  when  there  is  a  scarcity 
of  water  and  especially  in  periculo  mortis.  In  the  Roman 
Church  immersion  continued  to  be  used,  but  Thomas 
Aquinas  permitted  perfusio  or  pouring  upon  the  head. 
The  Council  of  Ravenna  in  1311  expressly  permitted  a 
choice  as  between  immersio  et  perfusio.     The  Church  of 


436  ECCLESIOLOGY. 

the  Middle  Ages  acknowledged  Baptism  as  a  means  of  grace. 
In  conformity  with  the  creational  theory  of  the  origin  of 
the  soul  and  the  doctrine  of  sin  it  was  taught  that  original 
sin  was  totally  eradicated  through  Baptism  and  a  new 
character  indelebilis  was  imparted.  It  was  taught  that 
sacramentum  poenitentiae  secured  deliverance  from  sins 
committed  after  Baptism.  Penance  was  considered  to  be  a 
secunda  tabula  salutis  for  such  as  had  fallen  from  Baptism 
as  out  of  the  ship  of  salvation.  The  Lutheran  Church  set 
forth  Baptism  as  a  means  of  grace  and  emphasized  its 
necessity  and  effect  as  the  Sacrament  of  regeneration. 
Stress  was  laid  on  the  subjective  state  as  being  of  prime 
importance  in  receiving  the  sacramental  blessing.  Infant 
Baptism  was  sanctioned  and  the  three  modes  of  the  ad- 
ministration of  the  Sacrament  were  acknowledged,  although 
pouring  was  the  method  generally  used.  The  Reformed 
Church  viewed  Baptism  either  as  a  symbol  of  purification 
or  of  church  membership  or  as  an  earnest  of  regeneration 
through  the  Spirit,  but  Baptism  was  not  considered  as  a 
real  means  of  grace.  The  Arminians  said  that  the  neces- 
sity of  Baptism  was  dependent  on  the  command  of  Christ. 
Baptism  is  merely  a  symbolic  action.  Infant  Baptism  was 
acknowledged,  but  it  was  not  considered  necessary.  Ra- 
tionalism and  the  philosophical  schools  of  thought,  of  course, 
minimized  the  significance  of  Baptism  and  at  most  viewed 
the  Sacrament  as  an  attractive  ceremony.  The  views  of  the 
mediating  theologians  correspond  closely  to  those  of  the 
Reformed  Church.  The  denominations  of  the  latter  church 
support  either  the  Zwinglian  or  the  Calvinistic  positions, 
with  the  exception  of  the  Baptists  and  others,  who  are  the 
modern  Anabaptists.  The  orthodox  theologians  have  con- 
tended for  the  conservative  positions  and  in  general  have 
combatted  the  exclusive  standpoint  of  the  Baptists.  Some 
theologians  have  especially  emphasized  the  influence  of 
Baptism  on  man's  human  nature.  They  have  stressed  the 
distinction  between  regeneration  in  infant  Baptism  and  in 
adults,   characterizing  the   former  as   substantial   and   ob- 


BAPTISM,  437 

jective,  the  latter  subjective  and  personal.     Below  are  set 
forth  more  detailed  notes  on  the  doctrine  of  Baptism. 

Barnaras  sets  forth  the  symbolic  significance  of  the  water  as  well 
as  of  the  cross  and  states  that  those  who  arise  out  of  the  water  have 
received  the  fruits  of  the  Spirit.  Hermas  says  that  the  forgiveness 
of  sins  is  the  fruit  of  Baptism.  The  patriarchs  were  baptized  in  the 
world  of  the  Spirit.  Ignatius  stated  that  the  Holy  Spirit  was  imparted 
in  Baptism.  In  the  Didache  (At8a;)(r/  ),  or  the  Teaching  of  the  Twelve 
Apostles  (chapter  seven),  immersion  as  well  as  pouring  are  acknowl- 
edged as  proper  modes  of  Baptism.  Inasmuch  as  the  Didache  dates 
from  the  first  century  the  significance  of  its  testimony  concerning  the 
mode  of  Baptism  is  very  great.  Justin  Martyr  speaks  of  the  forgive- 
ness of  sins,  purification  and  regeneration  in  Baptism  and  calls  the 
Sacrament  ^wTto-/Ao? .  He  says  that  he  was  personally  acquainted  with 
Christians  sixty  and  seventy  years  old  who  had  become  disciples  of 
Jesus  in  childhood.  He  expresses  himself  as  follows:  "We  admonish 
those  who  are  convinced  and  believe  that  what  is  taught  among  us 
is  true  and  who  promise  to  live  in  accordance  therewith,  in  the  first 
place  to  fast  and  pray  arid  implore  God  for  the  forgiveness  of  their 
sins,  while  we  fast  and  pray  with  them.  Afterwards  we  lead  them 
to  some  place  where  there  is  water  and  there  they  are  regenerated 
by  the  same  method  that  was  used  in  our  regeneration."  Irex.eus 
was  the  disciple  of  Polycarp  and  Polycarp  was  the  disciple  of  John. 
Ireneeus,  instructed  by  Polycarp,  expresses  himself  as  follows:  "He 
(Christ)  came  to  save  all  through  Himself;  all,  I  say,  who  through 
Him  are  born  again  unto  the  Lord,  infants,  small  children,  boys  and 
girls  and  adults.  For  this  reason  He  passed  through  every  age  of  man, 
becoming  an  infant  for  infants,"  etc.  Inasmuch  as  the  word  regenerate 
was  used  for  baptize  in  the  same  sense  as  we  use  christen,  therefore 
it  is  evident  that  infant  children  were  baptized.  Clement  of  Alex- 
andria said  that  Baptism  confers  the  forgiveness  of  sins,  sonship  and 
immortality.  Tertl'llian  said  that  the  Spirit  sanctifies  the  water. 
In  this  water  we  are  regenerated.  He  opposed  infant  Baptism  for  the 
reason  that  this  Sacrament  effects  the  forgiveness  of  all  sins  com- 
mitted prior  to  Baptism,  wherefore  he  considered  it  profitable  to  post- 
pone its  administration.  His  opposition  proves  that  infant  Baptism 
was  in  use.  The  manner  in  which  he  uses  the  word  baptism  precludes 
the  sense  of  immersion.  Pouring  seems  to  have  been  the  mode  in 
vogue  at  the  time.  Cyprian  calls  Baptism  the  second  birth,  producing 
a  new  creature.  In  the  Sacrament  forgiveness  is  conferred  for  sins 
previously  committed.  He  considered  that  children  should  be  bap- 
tized as  early  as  possible  and  called  a  council  of  African  bishops  which 
confirmed  the  validity  of  infant  Baptism.  He  defended  pouring  as  a 
mode  of  Baptism.  Origen  taught  that  Baptism  confers  the  forgiveness 
of  sins  and  the  Holy  Spirit  and  that  it  constitutes  the  potent  beginning 


438  ECCLESIOLOGY. 

of  the  new  life.  He  testifies  that  the  Church  from  the  time  of  the 
Apostles  had  received  the  command  to  baptize  children.  Origen  was 
born  in  185.  His  father,  grandfather  and  great-grandfather  were 
Christians.  It  may  also  be  stated  that  he  used  the  word  baptism  in 
the  sense  of  iiouring. 

Cykii,  of  Ji:ki-,sai,e.m  says  that  Baptism  confers  the  Holy  Spirit,  the 
forgiveness  of  sins  and  victory  over  death.  Basil  said  that  in  Baptism 
that  which  is  mortal  is  swallowed  up  in  immortality.  Gkkkoky  of 
Nvz/A  speaks  of  the  sick  being  baptized  by  means  of  pouring  or 
sprinkling.  Aigtstixk  acknowledged  infant  Baptism  and  taught  that 
the  faith  of  the  Church  takes  the  place  of  the  child's  faith.  Baptism 
works  the  forgiveness  of  sins  and  regeneration.  In  the  case  of  apostasy 
followed  by  conversion,  Baptism  Is  again  efficacious. 

Pktkr  Lomhahi)  said  that  the  effect  of  Baptism  consisted  in  a  renewal 
of  mind.  Adults  receive  in  Baptism  the  forgiveness  of  sins  together 
with  gratia  operans  et  cooperans,  but  children  receive  only  the  for- 
giveness of  original  sin.  Later  on,  however,  or  in  1311,  it  was  declared 
that  children  also  receive  the  gratia  above  referred  to.  Thomas 
Aquinas  taught  that  a  character  indelebilis  was  imparted  in  Baptism. 
Not  only  was  the  guilt  of  original  sin  removed,  but  the  sin  itself  was 
eradicated  so  that  the  evil  desires  remaining  in  the  heart  are  not  sin  but 
only  fomes  peccati.  The  Thomists  seem  to  have  taught  that  there  was 
spiritual  power  in  the  water  independent  of  the  Word  connected  there- 
with. Duns  Scotis  taught  that  in  Baptism  sin  was  not  washed  away 
through  the  water  and  the  Word,  but  through  the  will  of  God.  God, 
therefore,  operated  apart  from  Baptism.  While  the  Roman  Church 
taught  that  Baptism  eradicated  original  sin  through  the  impartation 
of  a  new  character  indelebilis,  still  the  blessing  of  Baptism  was  never- 
theless modified  by  this  additional  teaching  that  the  Sacrament  was 
efficacious  in  case  the  baptized  did  not  interpose  any  obstacle  (non 
ponit  obicem)  to  nullify  the  effect  of  Baptism.  This  came  only  to 
mean,  however,  that  the  baptized  was  not  to  be  guilty  of  any  mortal  sin. 

LuTHEK.  as  we  know,  has  clearly  and  completely  set  forth  the  doc- 
trine of  Baptism.  He  has  expressed  many  beautiful  thoughts  on  this 
Sacrament,  but  his  explanation  of  the  essence  and  significance  of 
Baptism  as  contained  in  his  catechisms  can  hardly  be  excelled.  Some 
have  asserted  that  Luther  was  an  immersionist  by  reason  of  his  utter- 
ances concerning  Baptism  in  a  sermon  in  1519.  His  statements  have 
indeed  been  colored,  although  it  is  true  that  he  did  then  prefer  im- 
mersion. Wc  ought  to  remember,  however,  that  this  utterance  occurred 
before  he  made  a  thorough  study  of  the  subject  and  ten  years  before 
the  publication  of  his  catechisms.  It  is  evident  that  Luther  in  1519 
believed  that  /3a7rTto-/u.ds  and  Taufe  meant  immersion  in  accordance 
with  their  etymology,  but  not  in  actual  practice.  Many  proofs  could 
be  advanced  to  show  that  Luther  considered  that  (3a7rTi(Tfi6<:   as  to  its 


BAPTISM,  439 

actual  use  meant  cleansing  or  purifying  independent  of  the  method. 
His  translation  of  the  Roman  ritual,  his  translation  of  the  Bible,  his 
own  ritual  for  Baptism,  which  prescribes  only  pouring,  together  with 
many  other  utterances  which  sanction  pouring  prove  that  he  was  not 
a  Baptist  as  to  the  method  of  administering  the  Sacrament.  In  the 
•Schwabach  Articles  of  3  529  he  wrote  that  we  baptize  with  water  (mit 
Wasser)  and  in  this  connection  uses  begiessen,  to  pour.  There  are 
some  who  would  prove  by  means  of  a  letter  written  in  1530  in  answer 
to  a  question  concerning  the  Baptism  of  a  Jewish  girl  that  Luther 
favored  immersion  as  the  only  method  of  Baptism.  The  misunder- 
standing concerning  the  advice  of  Luther  depended  on  an  Incorrect 
translation,  but  in  the  original  Latin  text  we  find  that  Luther  preferred 
pouring,  but  allows  both  methods  in  accordance  with  the  Latin  ritual. 
He  says:  "It  would  therefore  satisfy  me  (mihi  placeret)  if  water  wfere 
modestly  poured  on  her  (verecunde  perfunderetur),  or  if  she  sits  in 
water  which  reaches  to  her  neck,  that  her  head  be  immersed  with  a 
threefold  submersion  (caput  ejus  trina  immersione  immergeretur)." 
This  does  not  prove  that  Luther  was  a  Baptist,  but  merely  that  he  took 
the  liberal  position  of  our  Church  with  regard  to  the  mode  and  that 
he  preferred  pouring.  The  Augshtirg  Confession  in  articles  II  and  X 
expresses  clearly  the  Lutheran  position  concerning  the  necessity  and 
significance  of  Baptism.  It  teaches  that  original  sin  is  real  sin  and 
condemns  all  who  are  not  regenerated  through  Baptism  and  the  Holy 
Ghost.  Baptism  offers  and  confers  the  grace  of  God.  It  acknowledges 
infant  Baptism.  The  Apology  expresses  especially  the  Lutheran  doc- 
trine of  the  efiicacy  of  Baptism  in  relation  to  sin.  All  the  Confessional 
writings  set  forth  Baptism  as  a  means  of  grace.  Baptism  is  also 
called  sacramentum  pcenitentise,  signifying  that  Baptism  always  retains 
its  power,  always  extends  its  comfort  to  those  that  return  to  the  grace 
of  Baptism.  The  teaching  of  Jerome  is  therefore  rejected,  since  the 
ship  of  Baptism  is  not  destroyed,  but  through  sin  we  fall  out  of  the 
ship.  It  is  also  pointed  out  that  we  may  reenter  the  ship.  Zwingli 
considered  Baptism  as  a  symbolical  act  through  which  man  became 
obligated  to  purification  symbolized  by  the  water  at  Baptism.  Calvix 
viewed  Baptism  as  an  earnest  of  the  forgiveness  of  sins  and  regenera- 
tion, but  Baptism  is  not  a  vehicle  for  the  impartation  of  the  Spirit. 
Regeneration  is  brought  about  independently  of  Baptism.  The  Ca]- 
vinists  teach  concerning  Baptism  that  it  is  one  of  the  Sacraments  of 
the  New  Covenant  in  which  the  forgiveness  of  sins  and  regeneration 
are  sealed  upon  the  elect  who  are  received  into  the  family  of  God 
through  the  blood  of  Christ  and  the  Holy  Ghost.  The  efficacy  of 
Baptism  is  therefore  dependent  on  election.  The  Anabaptists  deny 
the  essence  of  Baptism  as  a  means  of  grace.  It  was  the  symbol  of 
obedience  and  therefore  necessary  in  that  sense.  Infant  Baptism  was 
rejected,    since    innocent    children    have   no   need    of    Baptism,    are   in- 


440  ECCLESIOLOGY. 

capable  of  believing,  and  can  receive  no  spiritual  benefit  through 
earthly  means.  The  Socinians  accepted  merely  the  Baptism  of  prose- 
lytes and  even  this  was  a  matter  of  indifference.  Infant  Baptism  was 
rejected  or  at  least  its  significance  was  minimized.  Baptism  was  not 
the  Sacrament  of  regeneration.  The  Ai-minians  taught  that  Baptism 
implies  merely  an  external  acknowledgment  of  a  covenant  through 
which  the  baptized  confess  their  faith  and  receive  the  witness  of  the 
grace  of  God.  The  old  Dogmaticians  spoke  of  a  double  materia  in 
Baptism.  Bkz.v  set  forth  that  the  blood  of  Christ  was  a  part  of  the 
substance  of  Baptism.  With  regard  to  materia  celestis  some  declared 
with  Luther  that  res  celestis  was  the  Word  or  the  name  of  God. 
Gkkh.vui).  Caloviu.s  and  Hor.L.\zns  took  the  position  that  the  res 
celestis  was  the  entire  Trinity,  but  especially  the  Holy  Ghost.  Hrr- 
•jKurs  said  that  it  was  the  blood  of  Christ,  while  Dan.nhaikk  declared 
that  it  was  the  Holy  Spirit.  The  old  Dogmaticians  also  held  divergent 
views  concerning  the  salvation  of  unbaptized  children.  Some  expressed 
hope  especially  for  the  children  who  were  born  within  the  fold  of  the 
Church.  Others  would  not  express  an  opinion.  To  the  latter  belonged 
Gerhard. 

SoHLEiKK.M.U'HEi!  looked  upon  Baptism  as  a  means  of  reception  into 
the  communion  of  the  Church,  through  which  also  the  individual 
entered  into  communion  with  Christ.  Infant  Baptism  is  a  perfect 
baptism  only  as  it  is  made  complete  through  instruction  and  confes- 
sion. Among  the  theologians  who  emphasize  the  influence  of  Baptism 
even  upon  the  physical  nature  of  man  we  would  mention  TnoMAsn's. 
who  says  that  the  Word  appeals  to  man  as  a  self-conscious  person, 
while  Baptism  affects  particularly  man's  nature  as  such,  the  Spirit 
reaching  down  to  the  depths  of  his  nature  and  influencing  both  his 
physical  and  spiritual  powers.  Martexsex  says  that  infant  Baptism 
effects  a  substantial  but  not  a  personal  regeneration  which  can  be 
brought  about  only  in  adults.  Graxfelt  says  that  infant  Baptism  is 
the  Sacrament  of  objective  regeneration  and  requires  a  subjective 
content.  This  is  supplied  in  confirmation,  which  constitutes  on  the 
part  of  the  grown  child  the  confirmation  of  the  covenant  with  Gocl 
entered  into  at  Baptism.  In  this  confirmation,  when  true  and  sincere, 
is  to  be  found  the  earnest  of  personal  regeneration  accomplished. 
S.  L.  Bkix(;  says  that  as  the  Spirit  of  God  in  the  beginning  of  creation 
moved  upon  the  face  of  the  waters,  so  in  Baptism  the  Spirit  hovers 
over  the  personal  and  human  nature  of  the  baptized  in  order  that 
through  the  consecrated  water  of  the  Sacrament  a  new  creature  may 
be  brought  about.  Through  Baptism  man  is  surrounded  with  a  holy 
and  spiritual  atmosphere,  which,  like  the  atmosphere  in  the  natural 
world,  becomes  the  element  in  which  we  live  spiritually.  He  declares 
that  infant  Baptism  is  the  normal  Baptism.  There  is  to  be  found  in 
the   child    even    prior   to    Baptism    an    embryonic,   yearning   faith,   but 


TUE  lord's  supper.  441 

through  Baptism  there  is  brought  about  a  receptive  and  apprehensive 
faith.  The  child  apprehends  the  grace  of  God  as  a  child  is  able  to 
apprehend.  Infant  faith  is  also  faith.  Gisle  Johnson  says  that  res 
celestis  is  the  Holy  Spirit.  Baptism  is  an  act  which  realiter  and 
effective  mediates  the  impartation  of  the  Holy  Spirit  to  the  sinner, 
which  means  that  regeneration  is  effected,  provided  the  immanent 
regenerating  power  of  Baptism  is  not  hindered  from  producing  its 
normal  effect.  Man  may  render  null  and  void  the  effect  of  Baptism, 
but  not  its  efficacious  power.  He  also  says  that  Baptism  possesses  this 
power  by  reason  of  its  organic  connection  and  co-operation  with  the 
Word.  He  further  states  that  regeneration  is  possible  through  the 
Word  alone  only  in  case  the  subjective  presuppositions  are  at  hand 
and  that  for  one  reason  or  another  the  Sacrament  cannot  be  admin- 
istered. 

§38.    THE  LORD'S  SUPPER. 

The  Lord's  Supper  was  instituted  at  a  Passover  feast 
when  Christ  and  His  disciples  for  the  last  time  celebrated 
this  Old  Testament  feast.  The  bread  that  was  broken  was 
the  bread  of  the  Passover,  while  the  cup  that  was  used 
contained  the  wine  of  the  feast.  The  Lord's  Supper  became 
a  new  Passover  supper.  The  antitype  took  the  place  of  the 
type.  Christ  became  the  true  paschal  Lamb.  His  body  and 
His  blood  corresponded  to  the  flesh  and  blood  of  the  lamb. 
If  the  true  paschal  Lamb  were  not  present  in  the  Holy  Sup- 
per, if  His  body  and  blood  were  not  really  imparted  in  the 
Sacrament,  then  the  substance  of  the  Lord's  Supper  would 
be  more  of  a  shadow  than  the  shadow  itself,  the  antitype 
would  have  less  significance  than  the  type,  and  the  Passover 
feast  of  the  Jews  would  be  more  real  than  the  Christian 
Sacrament  of  the  Altar.  The  Lord's  Supper  is  a  Sacrament 
in  the  full  sense  of  the  Word,  while  the  Passover  feast  of 
the  Jews  was  a  Sacrament  only  in  a  symbolic  sense.  It  was 
merely  a  shadowy  outline  which  was  filled  in  with  its  proper 
content  in  the  Lord's  Supper.  The  doctrine  of  the  Lord's 
Supper  belongs  to  the  deepest  mysteries  of  faith  and  leads 
us  into  a  holy  place  with  sacred  memories,  where  religion 
as  a  bond  of  communion  with  God  becomes  more  real  and 
palpable,  yet  mysterious,  where  the  religious  sense  of  devo- 
tion is  intensified,  and  where  our  communion  with  Christ, 


442  ECCLESIOLOOY. 

with  the  saints,  and  with  the  real  and  future  world  of  the 
Spirit  becomes  ever  increasingly  a  living  experience  in  our 
lives. 

1.  Definition  of  the  Lord's  Supper. 

The  Lord's  Supper  is  a  sacred  and  solemn  sacramental 
act  in  which,  on  the  basis  of  the  ivords  of  the  institution 
and  the  promises  connected  thereivith,  the  earthly  elements, 
the  bread  and  the  ivine,  become  vehicles  for  the  impartation 
of  the  true  body  and  blood  of  Christ  to  all  communicants, 
the  effects  differing  in  accordance  ivith  their  subjective 
state.  HOLLAZius  defines  this  Sacrament  as  follows:* 
"Eucharistia  is  the  sacred  and  solemn  action,  instituted  by 
Christ,  through  which  the  true  and  substantial  body  of 
Christ  by  means  of  consecrated  bread  and  His  true  and 
substantial  blood  by  means  of  consecrated  wine  are  given 
to  the  Christian  communicants  to  eat  and  drink  and  both  of 
them  to  be  received  an  eaten  and  drank  in  a  supernatural 
manner  in  commemoration  of  the  death  of  Jesus  and  in 
confirmation  of  the  grace  of  the  Gospel."  Causa  efficiens 
principalis  is  Christ,  who  instituted  the  Lord's  Supper. 
Cansa  impidsiva  interna  is  the  goodness  and  love  of  Christ. 
Causa  impulsiva  externa  is  the  merit  of  Christ,  His  suf- 
fering and  death.  Causa  instrumentalis  is  the  minister 
ecclesise. 

2.  The  Form  of  the  Lord's  Supper. 

The  forma  of  the  Lord's  Supper  consists  of  the  words  of 
the  institution,  the  distribution  and  the  reception  in  ac- 
cordance with  the  institution.  The  words  of  the  institution 
do  not  possess  magical  power  so  as  to  transform  the  ele- 
ments, as  the  Catholic  Church  teaches,  neither  are  they  a 
mere  repetition  of  the  historical  words  of  Christ,  but 
through  them  the  elements  are  set  apart  and  consecrated 
so  as  to  become  the  vehicles  of  the  body  and  blood  of 
Christ.  The  forma  comprises  three  parts:  1)  consecratio, 
through  which  the  bread  and  wine  are  set  apart  and  conse- 

*  Exam.  Theol.  Acroam.     Pars  III,  §2,  Cap.  v.  p.  579. 


THE  lord's  supper.  443 

crated  as  means  for  the  sacramental  action  of  the  Lord; 
2)  distrihutio,  or  the  distribution  of  the  elements  thus  set 
apart  and  consecrated;  3)  commimio  sen  sumtio,  or  the 
reception.  The  sacramental  union,  or  unio  sacramentalis, 
takes  place  in  the  distribution  and  the  reception  of  the  ele- 
ments in  accordance  with  the  institution  of  Christ.  On  the 
other  hand,  the  Catholic  Church  teaches  that  this  sacra- 
mental union  is  effected  during  the  reading  of  the  words  of 
the  institution,  the  officiating  priest  producing  transub- 
stantiation,  all  of  which  takes  place  independent  of  the 
distribution  and  the  reception.  The  Lutheran  Church  says 
that  the  sacramental  action  must  be  complete  and  that  the 
body  and  the  blood  of  Christ  are  present  in  the  use.  When, 
therefore,  the  sacramental  action  comprises  the  three  parts 
of  the  forma  of  the  Lord's  Supper,  then  we  say  that  the 
body  and  the  blood  of  Christ  are  really  present  in  coena 
Domini.  In  case  the  elements  are  not  distributed  and  re- 
ceived, then  there  is  no  Sacrament. 

3.  The  Elements  of  the  Lord's  Supper. 
Materia  terrestris  is  the  bread  and  wine.  The  bread  may 
be  leavened  or  unleavened.  The  wine  must  be  the  fermented 
juice  of  the  grape,  but  may  be  diluted  with  water,  if  neces- 
sary. The  breaking  of  bread  is  not  necessary  in  the  sacra- 
mental action.  Christ  did  not  break  the  bread  in  order  to 
symbolize  His  death  or  the  breaking  of  His  body.  Assuming 
that  the  text  of  1  Cor.  11 :  24  in  accordance  with  the  textus 
receptus  is  correct,  still  the  words,  "which  is  broken  for 
you,"  must  be  harmonized  with  Luke  22 :  19,  where  we  read, 
"given  for  you,"  and  also  with  Matt.  26 :  22  and  Mark  14 : 
22,  where  nothing  is  said  about  the  breaking  of  the  body. 
On  good  ground  the  best  critical  texts  have  elided  kAw/xevov 
from  1  Cor.  11 :  24.  If  the  breaking  of  the  bread  had  been 
symbolical  of  the  body  of  Christ,  then  we  should  have  ex- 
pected Him  also  to  pour  out  the  wine  as  being  symbolical 
of  the  shedding  of  His  blood.  From  the  Scriptures  we 
learn,  however,  that  He  simply  took  the  cup  and  bade  all 
the  disciples  drink  of  it. 


444  ECCLESIOI-OGY. 

Materia  celestis  is  the  true  bod}'  and  blood  of  Christ.  The 
specific  gifts  of  the  Lord's  Supper,  therefore,  consists  in  the 
partaking  of  the  true  body  and  blood  of  Christ  in  a  manner 
in  which  we  cannot  otherwise  receive  them.  The  whole 
Christ  is  present  in  the  Lord's  Supper,  but  the  sacramental 
union  has  reference  only  to  His  body  and  blood  which  are 
imparted  in,  with  and  under  the  bread  and  wine  and  are 
received  orally.  The  whole  Christ  is,  however,  received 
spiritually,  so  that  there  is  a  sacramental  eating  and  a  spir- 
itual eating.  The  latter  occurs,  so  to  speak,  with  the  mouth 
of  faith  in  the  reading  and  the  hearing  of  the  Word  of  God 
as  well  as  in  the  Lord's  Supper.  Only  those  communicants 
who  are  worthy,  however,  eat  spiritually  and  receive  the 
promise,  while  all  the  communicants  eat  and  drink  in  a 
sacramental  sense.  QUENSTEDT  says  in  this  connection : 
"It  is  one  thing  that  the  whole  Christ  is  present  in  the  Holy 
Supper,  and  another  that  the  whole  Christ  or  the  celestial 
object  is  united  with  the  element  of  bread  and  wine,  and 
thus  also  the  whole  is  sacramentally  eaten.  The  former  we 
affirm,  the  latter  we  deny.  For  we  say  that  the  body  of 
Christ  only  is  united  with  the  bread,  and  the  blood  with 
the  wine,  but  that  the  whole  Christ  is  received  spiritually 
by  the  mouth  of  faith."  Chemnitz  speaks  of  a  threefold 
manducation  in  the  Lord's  Supper:  1)  mayiducatio  panis, 
which  is  physical;  2)  ynanducatio  corporis  Christi,  which  is 
a  manducatio  oralis  and  a  sacramental  eating;  3)  mayidu- 
catio spiritualis,  which  takes  place  through  faith. 

4.    Further  Definition  and  Explanation  of  the 
Doctrine. 

The  doctrine  of  the  Lord's  Supper  may  be  determined  in 
a  negative  and  a  positive  manner.  The  negative  and  positive 
terms  supplement  each  other.  The  negative  terms  form  a 
framework  about  the  positive  terms  in  such  a  way  as  to 
cause  them  to  appear  in  a  clearer  light.  In  spite  of  all 
explanations,  however,  the  mystery  of  the  doctrine  of  the 
Lord's  Supper  remains  a  mystery  of  faith,  and  still  the 


THE  lord's  suppek.  445 

terms  that  are  here  used  serve  to  reveal  much  of  the  pro- 
found and  glorious  content  of  the  Sacrament. 

The  negative  terms,  or  that  which  we  do  not  teach,  but 
reject,  are  contained  principally  in  the  following  doctrines : 
1)  transuhstantiation.  This  doctrine,  held  by  the  Catholic 
Church,  implies  a  transformation  of  the  elements  in  the 
Sacrament.  The  Lutheran  Church  teaches  that  the  ele- 
ments are  not  changed  as  to  their  substance,  but  become 
vehicles  of  the  heavenly  gifts.  The  term  transuhstantia- 
tion was  not  officially  used  before  1215.  The  doctrine 
means  that  at  the  consecrating  words  by  the  priest  the  sub- 
stance of  bread  and  wine  ceases  to  be  and  is  changed  into 
another  substance,  namely,  the  body,  blood,  soul  and  di- 
vinity of  Jesus  Christ,  the  body  and  blood  of  our  Lord  only 
looking  like  bread  and  wine,  tasting  as  bread  and  wine,  but 
really  there  is  no  bread  or  wine.  In  the  Roman  Catholic 
celebration  thus  two  miracles  occur :  The  bread  and  wine 
are  transubstantiated  into  the  body  and  blood  of  Christ, 
and  these  celestial  elements  retain  the  accidents  and  proper- 
ties of  the  earthly  elements.  The  Roman  Church  believes 
that  "this"  refers  only  to  the  bread,  etc.,  and  not  to  the 
complex  and,  therefore,  says:  This  (bread)  is  my  body, 
etc.,  and  draws  the  conclusion :  The  bread  is  changed  into 
the  body  and  the  wine  into  the  blood;  2)  coyisiihstantiation, 
which  implies  that  a  conjunction  or  union  or  mixture  of 
the  elements  takes  place  in  a  local  and  physical  sense.  This 
expression  is  not  found  in  the  Confessions,  and  all  theo- 
logians of  the  Lutheran  Church  reject  it.  On  the  contrary, 
there  are  many  theologians  both  within  and  outside  the 
Lutheran  Church  who  have  clearly  testified  that  this  doc- 
trine is  un-Lutheran.  Among  these  may  be  mentioned 
Brentz,  Chemnitz,  Gerhard,  Baier,  Mosheim,  Bucer,  Per- 
rone  and  Möhler.  Even  the  philosopher  Leibnitz  bears 
testimony  to  the  fact  that  our  Church  rejects  the  doctrine 
of  consubstantiation ;  3)  impanation,  or  that  the  body  and 
the  blood  of  Christ  are  supposed  to  be  found  locally  in  the 
bread  and  the  wine  (invination) .  Our  Church  naturally 
rejects  impanation  and  invination  as  well  as  consubstantia- 


446  KCCLESIOLOGV. 

tion;  4)  Huhpanation,  or  that  the  body  of  Christ  in  a  phys- 
ical and  local  manner  is  present  under  or  beneath  the  bread ; 
5)  the  theory  of  imio  personalis,  or  that  the  union  as  be- 
tween the  elements  is  supposed  to  be  like  the  personal  union 
in  the  God-man;  6)  the  symbolical  or  significative  theory 
held  by  Zwingli.  According  to  Zwingli  and  his  adherents 
among  the  Reform.ed  sects  the  Lord's  Supper  is  only  a 
memorial  festival.  May  we  never  forget  the  great  his- 
torical incident  at  Marburg,  when  Luther  wrote  on  the 
table:  "This  is  my  body."  These  words  stand  as  an  im- 
pregnable fact  against  Rationalism,  Fanaticism  and  all 
sectarian  views  which  deny  the  plain  teaching  of  the  words 
of  the  institution  of  the  Sacramental  Supper;  7)  the  dij- 
nayyiic  theory,  or  that  the  substantial  presence  is  merely 
dynamic,  which  theory  is  characteristic  of  Calvinism.  That 
which  is  peculiarly  characteristic  in  the  Sacrament  is  lost 
in  accordance  with  the  dynamic  theory  because  of  the  fact 
that  the  sacramental  eating  is  like  the  daily  eating  of  the 
body  and  blood  of  Christ  in  the  reading  of  the  Word  and 
differs  from  it  only  as  to  manner  and  in  the  use  of  earthly 
and  symbolical  elements  which  together  with  the  solemnity 
of  the  celebration  of  the  Sacrament  affect  the  emotions. 
According  to  the  Bible  and  the  Lutheran  Church  the  bread 
and  wine  are  the  vehicles  of  the  true  body  and  blood  of 
Christ,  but  according  to  Calvin  the  Holy  Ghost  and  a  Chris- 
tian's faith  are  the  vehicles,  not  of  the  real  body  and  blood, 
but  only  conveying  the  power  immanent  in  the  body  and 
blood  of  Christ  in  heaven.  According  to  Paul  it  is  a  com- 
munion of  the  real  body  and  blood.  According  to  Calvin 
the  body  and  blood  of  Christ  are  absent. 

The  positive  terms  and  content  of  the  Lutheran  doctrine 
may  be  presented  in  the  following  propositions:  1)  The 
Lord's  Supper  is  a  Sacrament;  2)  it  is  a  real  supper;  3) 
it  is  a  covenant  act;  4)  the  sacramental  objects  are  the 
true  body  and  blood  of  Christ;  5)  the  sacramental  objects 
are  really  present  in  the  Holy  Supper;  6)  the  bread  and 
wine  are  vehicles  of  the  celestial  elements;  7)  the  celestial 
elements  are   received   by  all   the  communicants;    8)    the 


THE  lord's  supper.  447 

means  by  which  the  elements  are  received  is  called  mandu- 
catio  oralis.  A  fuller  development  of  the  content  of  these 
propositions  follows. 

1)  The  Lord's  Supper  is  a  Sacrament.  The  Lord's  Sup- 
per has  been  called  not  only  sacramentum  confirmationis 
but  also  sacramentum  nutritionis.  In  the  very  concept  of 
a  Sacrament  lies  the  thought  that  something  is  imparted 
in,  with  and  under  the  visible  elements.  We  meet  a  real 
analogy  of  this  relationship  in  the  tree  of  life  in  Paradise. 
Many  of  the  Church  Fathers  referred  to  this  analogy. 
Among  modern  theologians  we  quote  the  following  from 
Krauth  :*  "The  great  loss  of  Paradise  Lost  was  that  of  the 
Sacrament  of  Life,  of  that  food,  in,  with,  and  under  which 
was  given  immortality,  so  objectively,  positively,  and  really 
that  even  fallen  man  would  have  been  made  deathless  by  it. 
The  great  gain  of  Paradise  Regained  is  that  of  the  Sacra- 
ment of.  Life.  The  cross  is  the  center  of  Paradise  Regained, 
as  the  tree  of  life  was  the  center  of  the  first  Paradise.  —  In 
the  Garden  of  Eden  was  a  moral  miniature  of  the  universe ; 
and  with  the  act  of  eating  were  associated  the  two  great 
realms  of  the  natural  and  the  supernatural;  and  with  this 
was  connected  the  idea  of  the  one  as  a  means  of  entering 
the  other.  There  were  natural  trees  with  purely  natural 
properties.  But  there  was  also  the  natural  terminating  in 
the  supernatural.  There  were  two  trees,  striking  their 
roots  into  the  same  soil,  lifting  their  branches  into  the  same 
air — natural  trees — but  bearing,  by  heaven's  ordinance,  in, 
with,  and  under  their  fruitage,  supernatural  properties. 
One  was  the  sacramental  tree  of  good.  We  call  it  the  sacra- 
mental tree,  because  it  did  not  merely  symbolize  life,  or 
signify  it ;  but,  by  God's  appointment,  so  gave  life — in,  with, 
and  under  its  fruit — that  to  receive  its  fruit  was  to  receive 
life.  With  this  tree  of  life  was  found  the  tree  which  was 
the  sacrament  of  judgment  and  of  death.  —  By  an  eating, 
whose  organs  were  natural,  but  whose  relations  were  super- 
natural, man  fell  and  died."  All  of  this  may  serve  as  an 
analogy  to  the  Lord's  Supper.     There  we  find  bread,  the 

*  Krauth,  Conservative  Reformation,  pp.  586,  587. 


448 


KCCI.KSIOI.OCV. 


natural  food  of  mankind.  But  the  bread  serves  as  a  means 
to  produce  life  through  the  body  of  Christ.  In  the  Lord's 
Supper  there  is  also  to  be  found  an  element  of  judgment, 
inasmuch  as  every  unworthy  communicant  brings  damna- 
tion upon  himself. 

2)  The  Lord's  Supper  is  a  real  supper.  At  a  meal  the 
guests  are  not  served  with  symbols,  signs,  etc.,  but  with 
real  food.  When  the  Lord  prepared  a  special  supper,  the 
Holy  Supper,  this  would  indeed  lose  its  real  significance, 
provided  only  a  little  bread  and  wine  were  served.  But  if 
someone  should  say  with  regard  to  the  bread  and  wine  that 
were  served  by  the  host  that  they  were  merely  symbols  of 
the  bread  and  wine,  certainly  such  an  assertion  would  be 
considered  senseless.  At  the  Holy  Supper  we  are  the  guests 
of  the  Lord  and  He  is  the  Host  who  says:  "Take,  eat;  this 
is  my  body."  As  He  gives  the  cup  He  says:  "Drink  ye  all 
of  it;  for  this  is  my  blood."  In  the  face  of  these  declara- 
tions, can  we  say  that  the  Host,  who  is  the  everlasting 
Truth,  does  not  mean  what  He  says?  Indeed  not,  since  in 
such  case  Christ  would  be  inferior  to  an  ordinary  host. 
The  Lord  surely  gives  what  He  claims  to  offer.  The  bread 
and  cup  are  the  vehicles  of  the  food  and  drink  offered, 
namely,  the  body  and  blood  of  the  Lord,  just  as  a  plate  and 
a  cup  are  vehicles.  If  He  therefore  offers  us  His  body  to 
eat  and  His  blood  to  drink,  we  may  feel  assured  that  He 
imparts  His  body  and  blood.  Still  this  Sacrament  is  a  Holy 
Supper  in  commemoration  of  His  death  and  promises,  al- 
though the  significant  element  in  the  Lord's  Supper  is  its 
sacramental  character. 

3)  The  Lord's  Supper  co7istitutes  a  covenant  action.  In 
the  words  of  the  institution  the  Lord  says:  "This  is  my 
blood  of  the  covenant."  A  covenant  is  not  based  on  sym- 
bols, signs  or  similitudes,  but  must  have  a  real  foundation 
and  a  real  content.  There  may  indeed  be  signs  of  a  cove- 
nant, but  they  constitute  the  formal  side  of  the  contract, 
the  material  content  is  mainly  to  be  considered.  In  the 
drawing  of  a  covenant  and  the  specifying  of  conditions 
there  are  no  symbols  used,  the  language  employed  must  be 


THE  lord's  supper.  449 

clear  and  literal  in  its  meaning,  because  it  is  the  written 
word  which  decides  all  action.  The  content  of  a  covenant 
must  be  just  as  clearly  and  precisely  stated  as  a  last  will 
and  testament.  Indeed,  we  may  say  that  the  Lord's  Supper 
is  a  testament  in  which  the  Lord  before  His  death  expresses 
His  will  and  bestows  upon  His  own  both  Himself  and  all 
that  He  possesses.  This  is  the  New  Testament  and  the  New 
Covenant.  The  New  Covenant  is  sealed  with  the  blood  of 
Jesus,  wherefore  we  may  be  assured  that  the  content  is  real. 
4)  The  body  and  blood  of  Christ  are  the  sacr'amental 
objects.  On  carefully  considering  the  words  of  the  insti- 
tution we  shall  find  that  the  Lutheran  position  is  the  correct 
one.  Let  us  first  examine  the  meaning  of  tovto,  or  this. 
Does  TOVTO  mean  this  bread?  In  Greek  there  is  no  agree- 
ment between  tovto  and  apros,  inasmuch  as  the  former  is  of 
the  neuter  gender,  while  the  latter  is  masculine,  the  rule 
being  that  a  demonstrative  pronoun  must  agree  in  gender 
with  the  noun  it  modifies.  There  have  been  many  promi- 
nent theologians  representing  diflferent  tendencies  who  have 
declared  that  tovt  does  not  refer  to  apTo<;  (or  aprov  in  ac- 
cordance with  the  context).  Among  these  may  be  men- 
tioned Gerhard,  Quenstedt,  Bengel,  Maldonatus,  Lange, 
Stier,  Alford,  Schafi"  and  Krauth.  It  is  further  to  be  noted 
in  opposition  to  to?to  apro?  that  the  word  apro?  is  not  used 
by  the  Lord  Himself,  it  simply  occurs  in  the  story  of  Mat- 
thew. Neither  is  it  possible  to  combine  tovto  with  o-wp,a 
in  this  connection,  since  that  would  produce  an  identical 
proposition  as  follows:  This  body  is  my  body.  We  find, 
therefore,  that  to?to  refers  to  the  entire  complex  and  must 
be  understood  as  a  synecdoche.  When  Jesus  said:  "Take, 
eat;  this  is  my  body,"  He  meant:  This  which  I  offer  to  you 
to  take  and  eat  is  my  body.  This  argument  destroys  the 
foundation  of  the  theory  of  transubstantiation  which  is 
held  by  the  Catholic  Church,  since  the  bread  is  not  the  body 
of  Christ.  Rightly  understood,  however,  we  may  properly 
say  that  the  sacramental  bread  is  the  body  of  Christ.  These 
expressions  have  been  used  by  the  early  Church  Fathers 
and  also  by  Luther.     Luther  made  use  of  the  expression 


450  ECCLESIOLO(iY. 

in  order  to  emphasize  the  reality  of  the  bread  in  his  con- 
troversy with  the  Catholics.  He  also  made  use  of  it  against 
Carlstadt,  who  excluded  the  bread  from  the  complex  subject 
in  the  words  of  the  institution.  For  this  reason  the  Formula 
of  Concord  makes  use  of  the  following  terms*  :  "That  the 
bread  does  not  signify  the  absent  body  of  Christ  and  the 
wine  the  absent  blood  of  Christ,  but  that  on  account  of  the 
sacramental  union  the  bread  and  the  wine  are  truly  the 
body  and  blood  of  Christ."  Let  it  not  be  understood,  how- 
ever, that  Luther  and  others  intended  to  say  that  tovto 
referred  only  to  ä/aro?.  The  argument  concerning  tovto 
holds  in  relation  to  all  the  parallel  passages  that  bear  on 
this  subject.  Compare  Matt.  26:  26;  Mark  14:  22;  Luke 
22:  19;  1  Cor.  11:  24;  Matt.  26:  28;  Mark  14:  24;  Luke 
22:  20;  1  Cor.  11:  25.  In  objecting  to  this  doctrine  some 
theologians  have  made  use  of  Luke  22 :  20.  In  answer  we 
would  say  that  there  is  no  real  parallel,  inasmuch  as  the 
subject  in  the  passage  referred  to  is:  "This  cup,"  while  the 
predicate  is  not  the  blood  of  Christ  but  "The  new  covenant 
in  my  blood."  The  same  reasoning  holds  with  regard  to 
1  Cor.  10:  16,  where  "bread"  is  the  subject,  but  where  the 
body  of  Christ  is  not  the  predicate,  but  "A  communion  of 
the  body  of  Christ." 

It  is  necessarj'  for  us  also  to  examine  the  grammatical 
significance  of  the  copula  co-nV  or  "is"  in  the  words  of  the 
institution.  ZwiNGLi  and  those  like-minded  with  him  have 
translated  this  word  with  signifies,  sumbolizes,  etc.  But 
"is"  means  "is"  and  cannot  mean  anything  else.  There  is 
no  translation  of  acknowledged  worth  which  translates  eVrtV 
in  the  words  of  the  institution  with  signifies  or  symbolizes. 
There  is  no  impartial  dictionary  which  gives  "signifies"  as 
a  translation  of  to-rtV,  In  making  a  comprehensive  study 
of  the  passages  where  the  cupola  is  used  we  shall  find  that 
that  verb  must  have  its  literal  meaning.  If  this  verb  were 
to  be  translated  with  signifies  or  symbolizes,  then  the  sense 
of  the  Word  of  God  would  be  changed  wherever  this  copula 
is  used.  When  our  Lord  says  that  He  is  the  true  vine,  we 
♦Epitome  VII:  2. 


THE  lord's    supper.  4gl 

should  read :  I  am  a  symbol  of  the  true  vine.  God  is  a  Spirit 
would  be  translated :  God  is  a  symbol  of  a  Spirit,  etc.  The 
copula  must  be  understood  in  a  literal  sense  even  in  a  meta- 
phor. For  example,  in  Luke  8:  11  we  read:  "The  seed  is 
the  word  of  God."  The  seed  is  literally  the  Word  of  God. 
But  the  seed  is  not  seed  in  a  literal  sense,  since  in  that  case 
it  could  not  be  the  Word  of  God ;  the  reference  is  to  the  seed 
of  the  Gospel.  Hence  in  expounding  the  meaning  of  the 
copula  "is"  in  accordance  with  its  literal  sense  we  must  say 
that  the  words  of  Jesus,  "This  is  my  body,"  really  mean 
that  it  is  His  body.  There  is  no  foundation  for  the  Zwing- 
lian  theory.  If  there  were  a  simile  or  metaphor  in  the 
sentence  it  should  be  found  in  the  word  "body."  The  ques- 
tion then  arises  as  to  whether  the  real  body  of  Christ  is  to 
be  understood  in  a  literal  sense.  H  the  body  that  was  given 
for  us  was  the  body  of  Christ  in  a  true  sense,  then  it  follows 
that  the  body  which  is  given  in  the  Lord's  Supper  must  also 
be  the  true  body  of  Christ.  The  words  of  the  institution 
make  this  perfectly  clear.  Inasmuch  as  it  was  the  true 
body  of  Jesus  Christ  which  was  given  for  us,  therefore  we 
must  understand  the  word  "body"  literally.  The  words  of 
the  institution  are  not  a  metaphor.  For  the  same  reason 
also  it  is  His  true  blood  that  is  imparted  in  the  Sacrament, 
inasmuch  as  it  was  His  true  blood  that  was  shed  for  us. 
It  has  been  alleged  that  the  Lutheran  Church  interprets  the 
first  part  of  the  words  of  the  institution  literally,  while  she 
interprets  the  latter  part  concerning  the  cup  figuratively. 
But  this  is  not  the  case,  for  the  word  cup  means  not  only 
cup  in  a  literal  sense  but  by  metonymy  also  that  which  is 
contained  in  the  cup.  This  agrees  also  with  the  words  of 
the  institution  when  Jesus  took  the  cup  and  said :  "Drink 
ye  all  of  it."* 

The  words  of  the  institution,  therefore,  make  it  perfectly 
clear  that  the  sacramental  objects  in  the  Lord's  Supper  are 
the  body  and  blood  of  Christ.  When  theologians  make  use 
of  different  expressions,  such  as  natural  body  and  glorified 
body,  we  must  still  bear  in  mind  that  the  body  is  the  same, 

*  As  collateral  reading  study  Krauth's  Conservative  Ref.,  pp.  692 — 707. 


452  ECCLESIOLOQY. 

viz.,  the  body  which  suffered  on  the  cross  and  was  given 
for  our  sake.  The  characterizations  "true"  and  "natural" 
as  applied  to  the  body  of  Christ  have  reference  to  its  es- 
sence, while  "glorified"  has  reference  to  its  state  or  conditio. 
The  body  did  not  become  another  body  through  glorifica- 
tion. After  the  glorification  of  the  body  of  Christ,  however, 
those  divine  attributes  which  were  imparted  at  the  incarna- 
tion remain  in  continual  operation. 

Inasmuch  as  there  are  two  sacramental  objects  we  must 
exercise  care  lest  in  our  conception  we  dissolve  the  union 
between  the  body  and  blood  of  Christ.  Christ  is  a  living 
personality  whose  body  and  blood  are  imparted  in  a  sacra- 
mental way.  The  Christ  who  is  present  in  the  Holy  Supper 
was  dead,  but  lives  throughout  all  eternity.  At  the  same 
time  it  is  necessary  to  observe  the  twofold  manner  in  which 
the  sacramental  gifts  of  grace  are  imparted,  inasmuch  as 
the  Lord's  Supper  is  both  a  Kotvwvtu  to?  aiVaros  and  a  Koivwvia 

TOW    croj/xttTOS. 

5)  The  sacramental  objects  are  really  present  in  the  Lord's 
Supper.  The  tenth  article  of  the  Augsburg  Confession  ex- 
presses this  presence  as  vere  adsint  or,  in  German,  wahr- 
haftiglich  gegenwärtig  sei.  The  Apology  adds  et  substan- 
tialiter.*  The  possibility  of  the  real  presence  of  the  body 
and  blood  of  Christ  in  the  Lord's  Supper  is  scientifically 
proven  through  the  doctrine  concerning  communicatio  idio- 
matum.  A  clear  light  is  shed  on  the  real  presence  of  Christ 
in  the  Holy  Supper  by  a  careful  consideration  of  genus 
majesticum.  By  reason  of  the  fact  that  the  human  nature 
of  Christ  was  made  partaker  of  the  divine  attributes,  there- 
fore Christ  as  to  His  entire  person,  including  also  His 
human  nature,  is  omnipresent  in  a  divine  manner.  How- 
ever, the  human  nature  has  not  lost  its  attributes,  for  which 
reason  the  body  of  Christ,  and  therefore  in  a  sense  Christ 
Himself,  is  definitively  present  in  heaven  and  in  this  sense 
shall  remain  there  until,  in  accordance  with  His  promise. 
He  shall  again  return.  Our  Church  has  never  denied  the 
reality  of  the  ascension.    It  has,  furthermore,  never  taught 

*  Miiller,  Symb.  Bucher,  164,  54. 


THE  lord's    supper.  453 

that  Christ  is  locally  present  on  the  earth  or  in  the  Lord's 
Supper.  Neither  has  our  Church  taught  that  Christ  has 
two  bodies,  one  absent  and  the  other  present,  nor  that  the 
body  of  Christ  is  omnipresent  in  an  extensive  sense.  But 
on  the  ground  of  unio  personalis  and  communio  naturarum 
she  teaches  that  the  human  nature  of  Christ  is  absent  in 
one  mode  but  present  in  another  mode.  In  one  sense  Christ 
has  left  us,  while  in  another  He  is  present  with  us  always, 
even  unto  the  end  of  the  world.  He  has  ascended  into 
heaven,  and  yet  He  fills  all  space.  The  fullness  of  the  God- 
head dwells  in  Him  bodily,  and  just  as  the  divine  nature  is 
present  on  earth  and  everywhere  without  departing  from 
the  heavenly  abode,  so  the  human  nature  is  likewise  present 
everywhere  through  the  divine  nature.  The  presence  is 
substantial  and  yet  not  local.  By  reason  of  the  essential 
attributes  of  the  two  natures  these  two  modes  of  being 
present  are  equally  real  and  substantial,  inasmuch  as  the 
person  of  Christ  cannot  be  divided  nor  His  natures  sepa- 
rated from  each  other.  What  Christ  is  in  accordance  with 
the  one  nature  He  is  also  in  accordance  with  the  other.  The 
presence  of  the  human  nature  on  the  earth  through  the 
divine  nature,  with  which  it  constitutes  one  person,  is  just 
as  real  as  its  presence  in  heaven  on  account  of  its  own  attri- 
butes. We  may  speak  of  the  divine  presence  as  being  sub- 
stantial or  phenomenal  and  operative.  The  substantial  may 
exist  without  the  phenomenal,  but  not  the  latter  without 
the  former.  Krauth  says:*  "God's  substantial  presence  is 
alike  everywhere.  But  His  phenomenal  presence  varies  in 
degree.  'Our  Father  who  art  in  Heaven'  marks  His  purest 
phenomenal  presence,  as  making  that  home  to  which  our 
hearts  aspire.  As  there  is  phenomenal  presence,  so  there 
is  phenomenal  absence ;  hence,  God  Himself  is  frequently 
represented  in  Scripture  as  withdrawing  Himself,  and  as 
absent,  though,  in  His  essence,  He  neither  is,  nor  can  be, 
absent  from  any  part  of  the  Universe.  The  absence  of  God 
is,  so  to  speak,  a  relative  absence,  a  phenomenal  absence ; 
the  tokens  of  providence  and  grace  by  which  this  presence 

*  Conservative  Reformation,  p.  813. 


454  ECCLESIOLOGY. 

was  actualized,  not  only  to  faith,  but  even  to  experience, 
are  withdrawn.  So  the  natural  phenomenal  tokens  of  the 
presence  of  the  undivided  Christ  are  withdrawn,  yet  He  is 
still  present  substantially,  and  as  thus  present  is  operative 
in  the  supernatural  phenomena  of  His  grace."  By  reason 
of  the  ubiquitous  presence  of  Christ  He  may  also  be  spe- 
cially present  for  a  specific  purpose.  The  substantial  pres- 
ence becomes  specifically  operative  through  means.  In  the 
Lord's  Supper  the  substantial  presence  becomes  operative 
graciously  in  a  sacramental  way.  The  specific  gift  of  sacra- 
mental impartation,  or  the  body  and  blood  of  Christ,  is 
bestowed  upon  all  the  communicants  in  the  Lord's  Supper, 
but  the  whole  Christ  is  present  in  the  Sacrament  and  is 
received  spiritually  through  faith.  The  question  here  mere- 
ly concerns  the  sacramental  presence.  In  the  Lord's  Supper 
there  is  no  question  of  His  glorified  presence,  nor  of  His 
hypostatical  presence,  nor  yet  of  His  merely  spiritual  pres- 
ence, and  still  less  of  His  apprehensive  presence,  the  ques- 
tion is  as  to  whether  the  true  body  and  blood  of  Christ  are 
present  in  such  mode  as  to  their  actual  substance  that  they 
are  really  imparted  in,  with,  and  under  the  bread  and  wine. 
The  Lutheran  Church  teaches  that  the  body  and  blood  of 
Christ  are  really  present,  not  in  a  physical,  local  and  cir- 
cumscriptive sense,  but  in  a  supernatural,  illocal  and  defi- 
nitely sacramental  mode.  With  regard  to  the  objection  that 
the  ubiquity  of  Christ  as  to  His  entire  person  militates 
against  a  special  and  real  presence  of  His  body  and  blood 
in  the  Lord's  Supper,  HOLLAZius  says:*  "There  is  no  con- 
tradiction in  maintaining  that  He  is  omnipresent,  and  nev- 
ertheless is  presented  to  a  particular  person  by  a  special 
kind  of  presence.  For  thus  we  read  that  the  omnipresent 
Holy  Spirit  descended  on  Christ  in  the  form  of  a  dove,  was 
communicated  to  the  apostles  under  the  form  of  fiery 
tongues,  and  dwells  truly  and  by  His  gracious  presence  in 
the  bodies  of  the  godly.  Although,  therefore,  a  general 
omnipresence  is  communicated  to  the  assumed  flesh  of 
Christ  by  reason  of  the  personal  union,  yet  that  does  not 
♦  Exam.  Theol.  Acroam.    Pars  III,  §2,  Cap.  V,  Qu.  xii,  p.  605. 


THE  lord's  supper.  455 

prevent  or  destroy  a  special  and  sacramental  presence  of 
the  body  of  Christ." 

The  objection  has  been  made  that  the  communication  of 
the  body  and  blood  of  Christ  at  the  institution  of  the  Lord's 
Supper  was  different  from  that  which  now  occurs,  since 
Christ  ascended  into  heaven.  The  objection  implies  that 
Christ  could  not  communicate  His  true  body  and  blood 
while  He  Himself  sat  or  lay  at  the  table  at  the  Paschal  feast. 
But  the  communication  was  the  same  and  the  mode  the 
same  as  now  occurs.  It  was  the  same  body  and  the  same 
blood.  The  possibility  of  the  first  communication  is  ex- 
plained in  the  same  way  as  all  subsequent  communications, 
viz.,  through  genus  majesticum.  At  the  institution  of  the 
Lord's  Supper,  Christ,  also  in  accordance  with  His  human 
nature,  used  the  divine  attributes  which  had  been  com- 
municated to  this  nature  in  the  incarnation-  That  which 
occurred  then,  seemingly  so  wonderful  and  incomprehensi- 
ble, was  no  more  miraculous  and  supernatural  than  what 
occurs  now.  Whether  Christ  is  phenomenally  near  or  far 
away  at  the  Lord's  Supper,  this  neither  increases  nor  di- 
minishes His  substantial  presence  or  His  definitely  sacra- 
mental presence.  Our  material  sense  cannot  decide  this. 
There  is  much  in  the  material  world  which  cannot  be  per- 
ceived by  our  material  senses ;  why  should  there  not  be 
possible  a  supernatural  presence  without  our  senses  perceiv- 
ing it?  There  are  many  thinkers  embracing  the  theories 
of  the  idealistic  philosophy  who  acknowledge  in  philosophy 
what  they  reject  in  religion.  The  questions  at  issue  may 
not  be  identical,  but  they  nevertheless  present  phases  that 
in  some  respects  are  analogous.  Men  are  ready  to  accept 
the  dogmatic  assertions  of  philosophy,  but  with  regard  to 
the  Christian  doctrines  they  demand  observation  and  ex- 
periment. 

There  have  been  some  misconceptions  concerning  the 
presence  of  Christ  as  being  Capernaitic'"  (the  physical  mode 


*  "Capernaitic  mode"  was  the  false  conception  of  spiritual  eating  and 
drinking  by  some  persons  in  Capernaum.  They  thought  that  Christ 
meant  the  eating  and  drinking  of  natural  flesh  and  blood.     Compare 


456 


ECCI.ESIOI.OOY. 


of  eating  and  drinking).  But  even  nature  teaches  us  that 
the  same  substance  under  different  conditions  may  possess 
different  attributes.  For  example,  we  may  consider  the 
different  states  in  which  we  find  water,  whether  as  plain 
water,  ice  or  steam,  or  we  may  think  of  its  component  ele- 
ments, such  as  the  oxygen  and  the  hydrogen,  still  it  is  the 
same  water.  The  body  of  Christ  was  of  the  same  substance 
after  His  resurrection  as  before,  but  possessed  of  pneumatic 
attributes.  The  divine  power  can  perform  wonders  in  the 
natural  world,  and  what  shall  we  say  of  the  supernatural 
world?  Science  with  all  its  discoveries  is  still  in  many  cases 
stumbling  at  letters;  it  finds  it  difficult  to  place  them  to- 
gether to  form  words  and  still  more  difficult  to  formulate 
the  words  into  sentences.  New  discoveries  are  being  made 
continually.  Our  knowledge  of  the  ether,  which  pervades 
all  things,  sheds  a  new  light  on  many  things  that  formerly 
were  enigmatical.  We  must,  however,  remember  that  the 
omnipresence  of  God  as  well  as  the  sacramental  presence 
of  Christ  can  never  be  explained  in  a  natural  way,  but  we 
must  believe  the  Word  of  Almighty  God.  There  is  no  satis- 
factory and  complete  analogy.  Luther  speaks  of  the  sub- 
stance of  the  bread  and  the  wine  being  permeated  with  the 
substance  of  the  body  and  blood  of  Christ  as  the  iron  is 
permeated  with  heat  in  the  forge  or  as  the  crystal  is  bathed 
with  light  in  being  held  up  to  the  sun.  The  whole  substance 
of  the  sunlight  is  in  the  crystal  and  yet  it  is  not  localized 
in  the  ordinary  way.  In  the  same  way  the  whole  substance 
of  the  body  of  Christ  permeates  the  bread  and  the  whole 
substance  of  the  blood  of  Christ  permeates  the  wine.  On 
the  basis  of  God's  Word,  however,  we  are  certain  that  the 
body  and  blood  of  Christ  are  present  in  the  Lord's  Supper. 
6)  The  bread  cmd  ivine  are  vehicles  of  the  heavenhj  ele- 
ments. The  tenth  article  of  the  Augsburg  Confession  makes 
use  of  the  words,  "unter  der  Gestalt  des  Bröts  und  Weins." 
The  Formula  of  Concord"^'  uses  the  word  species.     Species 

John  6:   52.     In  the  Supper  the  body  and  blood,  unlike  the  bread  and 
wine,  are  not  subject  to  mastication,  etc..  althou.sh  we  teach  manducatio 
oralis.    Compare   8)   Manducatio  oralis. 
*  Miiller,  Synib.  Biicher,  p.  fi74.  126. 


THE  lord's  supper.  457 

corresponds  to  Gestalt.  The  tenth  article  of  the  Augsburg 
Confession  sets  forth  that  the  earthly  elements  are  bread 
and  wine  in  a  real  sense  and  not  their  accidents.  Both  of 
the  elements  are  equally  emphasized,  for  which  reason  the 
Confessions  reject  the  Catholic  doctrine  of  de  concomitantia. 
Inasmuch  as  each  element  is  the  special  vehicle  of  its  own 
gift,  therefore  both  of  the  elements  must  be  used.  The 
bread  is  the  bearer  of  the  body  of  Christ  and  not  the  blood, 
while  the  wine  is  the  bearer  of  the  blood  of  Christ  and  not 
the  body.  The  Lutheran  doctrine  corresponds  to  the  words 
of  Paul  in  1  Cor.  10 :  16 :  "The  cup  of  blessing  which  we 
bless,  is  it  not  a  communion  of  the  blood  of  Christ?  The 
bread  which  we  break,  is  it  not  a  communion  of  the  body 
of  Christ?"  In  this  passage  both  of  the  elements  are  men- 
tioned. That  which  serves  as  a  means  of  communication 
cannot  be  identical  with  that  which  is  communicated.  This 
passage,  therefore,  militates  against  the  doctrine  of  tran-- 
substantiation.  It  likewise  makes  untenable  the  position  of 
the  Calvinists  concerning  the  Lord's  Supper.  According  to 
this  latter  theory  the  Holy  Ghost  communicates  the  body 
and  the  blood  of  Christ,  but  in  accordance  with  Paul  the 
bread  and  the  wine  are  the  vehicles  of  the  heavenly  ele- 
ments. Calvin  says  that  faith  is  the  means  of  mediation 
and  that  only  the  believers  receive  the  heavenly  elements. 
In  consequence  the  unbelievers  receive  only  the  bread  and 
wine.  But  Paul  says  expressly  that  there  are  some  who 
eat  and  drink  unto  themselves  judgment,  not  discerning  the 
body  of  Christ.  In  accordance  with  Calvin  the  Lord's  Sup- 
per is  a  communion  of  power  which  proceeds  from  Christ, 
while  in  accordance  with  Paul  it  is  a  communion  of  the  body 
and  blood  of  Christ. 

Objections  have  been  made  to  the  use  of  the  expression 
"in,  with  and  under"  the  bread  and  wine.  The  Lutheran 
Church,  by  this  expression,  simply  intends  to  set  forth  that 
the  sacramental  bread  and  wine  are  the  vehicles  of  the 
body  and  blood  of  Christ.  Our  Church  does  not  lay  special 
emphasis  on  any  one  word  of  this  expression  but  equal 


4r)S  ECCLKSIOI.Or.Y. 

emphasis  on  all.  The  P'ormula  of  Concord*  explains  the 
use  of  the  expression  "in,  with  and  under"  as  being  nega- 
tive terms  in  relation  to  the  Catholic  and  the  Reformed 
positions,  but  also  as  positive  terms  as  setting  forth  the 
union  of  the  earthly  and  the  heavenly  elements.  Inasmuch 
as  there  is  a  sacramental  union,  the  body  and  the  blood  of 
Christ  are  not  communicated  by  the  side  of  or  independent 
of  the  bread  and  the  wine,  but  "in,  with  and  under"  the 
bread  and  wine. 

7)  The  heavenly  elements  are  received  by  all  the  com- 
municants. The  Augsburg  Confession  uses  the  expression 
distribuantur  vescentibus,  while  the  Formula  of  Concord 
expressly  sets  forth  the  doctrine  of  communio  impiorum. 
It  is  not  the  faith  of  men  that  makes  the  Word  of  God  a 
means  of  grace,  nor  the  Sacraments  means  of  grace  and 
Sacraments.  When  the  Word  of  God  is  preached  and  read 
it  becomes  to  some  the  savor  from  death  unto  death,  to 
others  the  savor  from  life  unto  life.  The  sick  and  the  well 
may  eat  of  the  same  wholesome  food,  but  to  the  former  it 
may  act  as  poison,  while  the  latter  are  nourished  and 
strengthened  by  it.  A  lump  of  ^gold  or  a  precious  diamond 
may  come  into  the  possession  of  a  person  who  does  not 
appreciate  their  value,  and  yet  their  value  remains  the 
same.  There  were  many  who  came  in  contact  with  our 
Lord  when  He  was  on  the  earth,  but  all  did  not  experience 
the  effects  of  His  healing  and  gracious  power.  The  same 
holds  true  with  regard  to  the  Lord's  Supper.  Compare  1 
Cor.  11:  27 — 30:  "Wherefore  whosoever  shall  eat  the  bread 
or  drink  the  cup  of  the  Lord  in  an  unworthy  manner,  shall 
be  guilty  of  the  body  and  the  blood  of  the  Lord.  But  let 
a  man  prove  himself,  and  so  let  him  eat  of  the  bread,  and 
drink  of  the  cup.  For  he  that  eateth  and  drinketh,  eateth 
and  drinketh  judgment  unto  himself,  if  he  discern  not  the 
body.  For  this  cause  many  among  you  are  weak  and  sickly, 
and  not  a  few  sleep."  This  passage  proves  conclusively 
that  those  who  participate  unworthily  in  the  Lord's  Supper 
nevertheless  receive  the  body  and  blood  of  Christ.     The 

♦  Miiller,  Symb.  Biicher.  p.  654,  35—40. 


THE  lord's  supper.  459 

question  has  been  raised  as  to  whether  Judas  was  present 
at  the  Lord's  Supper  and  received  the  elements.  Matthew 
and  Mark  tell  of  how  Jesus  sat  at  meat  with  the  twelve 
disciples,  but  say  nothing  of  His  departure.  In  the  begin- 
ning of  his  gospel  Luke  states  that  he  has  made  an  accurate 
investigation  of  all  things  from  the  first  and  that  he  pur- 
posed to  write  an  orderly  narrative.  According  to  him, 
immediately  after  the  Lord's  Supper  Jesus  said:  "But  be- 
hold, the  hand  of  him  that  betrayeth  me  is  with  me  on  the 
table"  (Luke  22:  21).  The  Gospel  of  John  contains  no 
account  of  the  Lord's  Supper,  for  which  reason  the  state- 
ment in  John  13 :  30  cannot  be  considered  decisive  in  the 
determination  of  the  presence  or  the  absence  of  Judas  at 
the  Supper  itself.  Hence  special  importance  attaches  to  the 
narratives  of  the  Synoptics.  It  would  therefore  seem  to 
be  almost  certain  that  Judas  was  a  communicant  at  the 
first  Supper  of  the  Lord.  In  any  case  the  doctrine  of  the 
Confession  is  in  accord  with  the  Word  of  God. 

8)  Manducatio  oralis.  The  Formula  of  Concord  makes 
use  of  this  expression.  Just  as  the  reception  of  the  Word 
of  God  is  mediated  through  the  ear  and  the  eye,  so  it  is 
necessary  that  the  Lord's  Supper  be  mediated  in  some  man- 
ner. The  only  possible  way  is  by  means  of  manducatio 
oralis,  since  the  elements  must  necessarily  be  taken  through 
the  mouth.  The  bread  and  the  wine  are  received  by  the 
mouth  immediately  and  naturally;  the  body  and  the  blood 
of  Christ  are  received  mediately  and  supernaturally.  The 
eating  is  spiritual  in  opposition  to  the  Capernaitic  theory 
of  manducation;  but  it  is  likewise  real  in  opposition  to  the 
purely  spiritual  theory  of  manducation  as  held  in  the  Re- 
formed doctrine  of  the  Lord's  Supper. 

5.  The  Effect  and  Object  of  the  Lord's  Supper. 
The  Sacrament  of  Baptism  is  called  sacramcntnm  rege- 
»erationis  and  the  Sacrament  of  the  Lord's  Supper  is  called 
sacramentum  confirmationis  et  nutritionis.  In  this  latter 
term  is  expressed  the  general  purpose  of  the  Lord's  Supper. 
The  finis  et  effectus  of  this  Sacrament  are  divided  and  de- 


400  ECCLESIOLOGY. 

fined  as  follows:  1)  finis  et  effectus  principalis:  a)  the  con- 
firmation of  the  Gospel  promises  concerning  the  forgiveness 
of  sins  and  the  strengthening  of  faith;  b)  communion  with 
Christ,  spiritual  nourishment  unto  life  everlasting  and  the 
confirmation  of  the  hope  of  a  blessed  resurrection.  There 
are  some  theologians  who  declare  that  the  effect  is  twofold, 
inasmuch  as  there  is  a  twofold  Kot^wna.  In  this  respect  the 
feast  of  the  Passover  is  supposed  to  have  been  a  type.  The 
blood  of  the  sacrificial  lamb  meant  atonement,  while  the 
eating  of  the  flesh,  according  to  Kurtz,  on  account  of 
the  atonement  meant  the  closest  communion  with  Jeho- 
vah, a  sharing,  so  to  speak,  of  one's  house  and  board  with 
God.  In  the  Lord's  Supper  it  is  expressly  stated :  "This  is 
my  blood  of  the  covenant,  which  is  poured  out  for  many 
unto  remission  of  sins."  Inasmuch  as  the  wine,  which  is 
the  symbol  of  refreshing,  as  a  vehicle  communicates  the 
blood  of  Christ,  therefore  the  believer  receives  an  earnest 
of  the  forgiveness  of  his  sins.  In  the  forgiveness  of  sins 
through  the  atoning  blood  faith  finds  its  hypostasis  and 
sure  foundation.  The  bread,  which  is  the  symbol  of  nutri- 
tion, as  a  vehicle  communicates  the  body  of  Christ,  through 
which  the  believer  is  spiritually  nourished  unto  everlasting 
life;  2)  finis  miyiiis  principalis:  a)  the  commemoration  of 
the  death  of  Jesus  in  meditation  and  testimony  (Luke  22: 
19;  1  Cor.  11:  25,  26)  ;  b)  the  strengthening  of  the  bond 
of  union  among  the  believers.  Cf.  1  Cor.  10 :  17 :  "Seeing 
that  we,  who  are  many,  are  one  bread,  one  body :  for  we 
all  partake  of  the  one  bread";  c)  the  hopeful  assurance  of 
the  perfect  communion  with  the  Lord  Jesus  in  His  kingdom, 
since  the  Lord's  Supper  is  not  simply  a  feast  of  remem- 
brance but  also  of  promise.  Cf.  Luke  22:  15 — 20;  3)  finis 
ultimus  is  the  eternal  salvation  of  the  communicants. 

The  efl'ects  and  the  design  of  the  Lord's  Supper  are  ful- 
filled if  the  Sacrament  is  participated  in  worthily  and  the 
communicant  remains  faithful  even  unto  the  end.  All  the 
communicants  receive  the  body  and  blood  of  Christ,  but 
only  the  believers,  whether  their  faith  be  weak  or  strong, 
enjoy  the  blessed  effects  of  the  Lord's  Supper.     It  is  also 


THE  lord's  SrPPER.  461 

true  that  the  believers  may  under  the  varying  circumstances 
of  life  be  more  or  less  receptive  to  the  effects  of  the  Sacra- 
ment. It  may  also  happen  that  a  believer  may  not  prove 
equally  worthy  at  all  times.  Possibly  the  chastisement  that 
is  described  in  1  Cor.  11 :  30  is  sometimes  visited  upon  care- 
less and  v^eak  Christians  because  of  the  fact  that  they  are 
forgetful  as  to  their  conduct  in  the  house  of  the  Lord  and 
in  the  holy  of  holies.  The  judgments  of  the  Lord  may  differ 
as  to  degree,  but  they  are  not  judgments  unto  damnation. 
Compare  1  Cor.  11:  32:  "But  when  we  are  judged,  we  are 
chastened  of  the  Lord,  that  we  may  not  be  condemned  with 
the  world."  It  is  vitally  important  to  be  guided  by  the 
judgments  of  the  Lord  that  a  worse  thing  may  not  happen 
to  us.  On  the  other  hand,  the  communicant  who  is  dis- 
honest, unrepentant,  faithless,  and  therefore  really  un- 
worthy, shall  be  guilty  of  the  body  and  the  blood  of  the 
Lord,  If  he  persist  in  his  impenitence  his  Kpi>a  (judgment) 
shall  become  a  Kara/c/oi/xa  (condemnation).  The  believers  are 
always  worthy,  because  they  embrace  the  merit  of  Christ, 
and  even  where  there  are  shortcomings  and  imperfections 
in  their  daily  walk  and  conversation,  still  they  do  not  receive 
the  Sacrament  unto  condemnation.  It  is  only  the  unbe- 
lievers who  are  unworthy  in  the  real  sense.  When  Luther 
in  his  small  catechism  sets  forth  faith  as  the  condition  of 
true  worthiness  and  as  constituting  the  proper  preparation 
for  the  Holy  Supper,  he  does  not  thereby  determine  the 
degree  of  faith,  but  merely  its  necessity.  The  spiritual 
eating  as  set  forth  in  John  6:  53 — 58  is  regularly  a  pre- 
requisite for  a  worthy  participation  in  the  Lord's  Supper. 
But  faith  has  many  degrees.  The  Formula  of  Concord,* 
Epitome  VII,  Affirmative  9,  says  in  this  connection :  "We 
believe,  teach  and  confess  that  no  true  believer,  as  long  as 
he  retain  living  faith,  however  weak  he  may  be,  receives 
the  Holy  Supper  to  his  judgment,  which  was  instituted 
especially  for  Christians  weak  in  faith,  and  yet  penitent, 
for  the  consolation  and  strengthening  of  their  weak  faith." 

*  Miiller,  Symb.  Biicher,  p.  541,  19. 


462  ECCLESIOLOGY. 

6.    Notes  on  the  History  of  Dogma. 

During  the  first  or  the  Apologetic  period  the  Church 
Fathers  in  general  held  realistic  views  and  taught  that  both 
the  earthly  and  heavenly  elements  were  communicated  and 
received  in  the  Lord's  Supper.  From  the  time  of  Cyprian 
the  Holy  Supper  came  to  be  looked  upon  as  a  sacrifice  which 
the  priest  offered.  With  a  few  exceptions  the  Church  Fa- 
thers during  the  Polemical  period  also  adopted  a  realistic 
view  of  the  Lord's  Supper.  They  did  not  support  the  theory 
of  transubstantiation,  although  their  expressions  might  be 
so  interpreted.  The  Lord's  Supper  was  compared  to  the 
incarnation  of  Christ,  but  their  views  concerning  the  rela- 
tionship of  the  natures  of  the  Lord  prove  that  the  com- 
parison was  used  as  an  analogy  of  the  realistic  theory. 
They  also  taught  that  the  unworthy  communicants  receive 
the,  body  and  blood  of  Christ.  The  efi"ects  of  the  Lord's 
Supper  are  both  spiritual  and  bodily.  There  were  several 
who  taught  that  the  Lord's  Supper  was  a  repetition  of  the 
sacrifice  of  Christ  on  the  cross.  During  the  Scholastic 
period  the  doctrine  of  the  Roman  Church  was  more  defi- 
nitely developed.  After  the  time  of  Paschasius  Radbertus 
the  theory  of  transubstantiation  became  generally  adopted, 
although  there  were  many  opponents  to  the  theory.  The 
doctrine  was  further  developed  by  Hildebert  of  Tours  and 
Lanfrank.  After  the  Lateran  Council  in  1215  the  doctrine 
of  transubstantiation  received  general  and  official  acknowl- 
edgment and  sanction.  It  was  customary,  in  support  of  the 
position  of  the  Catholic  Church  in 'withholding  the  cup  from 
the  laity,  to  set  forth  the  doctrine  of  de  concomitantia,  or 
that  the  whole  Christ  is  present  in  the  bread  and  the  wine. 
The  argument  was  urged  that  in  a  body  flesh  and  blood  are 
never  separated  from  each  other.  Inasmuch  as  the  Lord's 
Supper  constituted  a  renewed  sacrifice  of  Christ,  therefore 
the  doctrine  of  the  sacrifice  of  the  mass  together  with  its 
consequences  was  developed.  The  Protestants  rejected 
these  views,  but  while  the  so-called  ultra-Protestants  went 
to  extremes  in  diff'erent  directions,  the  Lutheran  Reforma- 


TiTE  lord's  supper.  463 

tion  took  a  conservative  position  which  brought  about  a 
return  to  the  doctrine  of  the  early  Church  such  as  it  was 
set  forth  during  the  Apostolic  and  the  Apologetic  periods. 
Luther  presented  his  doctrine  of  the  Lord's  Supper  in  his 
work  Das  grosse  Bekentniss  vom  Abendmal,  in  his  cate- 
chisms, etc.  Zwingli  set  forth  the  symbolic  theory  and 
Calvin  the  dynamic  theory.  Melanchthon's  doctrine  dif- 
fered from  that  of  Luther,  although  possibly  in  his  heart 
he  supported  the  Lutheran  position.  In  accordance  with 
Melanchthon  and  Calvin  the  bread  and  the  wine  are  not 
vehicles  of  the  heavenly  elements.  Melanchthon's  position 
exerted  its  influence  on  the  Crypto-Calvinists,  who  made 
use  of  expressions  as  found  in  his  writings,  such  as  "in  the 
act  of  the  administration  of  the  Lord's  Supper,"  "in  con- 
nection with"  or  "cum."  The  Crypto-Calvinists  rejected 
the  doctrine  of  a  substantial  presence  and  a  real  eating  and 
drinking  of  the  body  and  the  blood  of  Christ,  while  they 
asserted  that  Christ  was  present  merely  spiritualiter  per 
fidem.  The  Formula  of  Concord  set  forth  the  Lutheran 
position  against  the  Sacramentarians.  The  Arminians, 
Socinians,  and  others  in  the  main  adopted  the  Zwinglian 
symbolic  view.  The  Socinians  prepared  the  way  for  the 
Rationalists,  who  laid  stress  simply  on  the  beauty  of  the 
Sacrament  as  a  ceremonial  in  remembrance  of  the  Lord. 
The  Supranaturalists  taught  merely  the  operative  presence 
of  Christ  and  laid  stress  on  His  moral  influence.  The  medi- 
ating theologians  adopted  the  doctrines  of  the  Reformed 
Church  in  various  forms.  Several  of  the  more  recent  theo- 
logians set  forth  the  effect  of  the  Lord's  Supper  on  man's 
human  nature.  All  the  leading  views  on  the  Lord's  Supper 
have  their  supporters  in  our  own  day.  However,  there  has 
not  been  any  new  development  of  the  dogma,  although  im- 
portant contributions  have  been  made  in  an  endeavor  to 
render  more  clear  the  content  of  the  Sacrament,  while  all 
acknowledge  that  the  Lord's  Supper  is  indeed  a  mystery 
of  faith. 

Ignatius  held  a  realistic  view  of  the  Lord's  Supper.     He  writes  to 
Smyrna:    "They    (docetae)    abstain  from  the  Eucharist  and  prayer  be- 


464  ECCLESIOLOOY. 

cause  they  do  not  confess  that  the  Holy  Supper  is  the  flesh  of  our 
Saviour,  Jesus  Christ,  which  suffered  for  our  sins."  To  Philadelphia 
he  writes:  "Hasten  ye  then  to  partake  of  the  Eucharist,  for  there  is 
the  one  flesh  of  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ  and  one  cup  for  the  uniting  of 
His  blood."  He  writes  to  Ephesus:  "The  breaking  of  one  bread  which 
is  the  medicine  of  immortality,  the  antidote  that  we  should  not  die, 
but  live  in  Jesus  Christ  forever."  Justi.v  M.-xutyk  sets  forth  that  the 
body  and  the  blood  of  Christ  are  the  sacramental  objects  and  that  they 
stand  in  such  relation  to  the  bread  and  the  wine  that  the  reception 
of  the  earthly  elements  implies  also  the  communication  of  the  body 
and  the  blood  of  Christ.  Ire.n.kis  taught  that  there  is  a  copraesentia 
between  the  two  elements  and  that  the  earthly  elements  are  the  means 
by  which  the  heavenly  elements  are  mediated.  The  effect  is  super- 
natural and  extends  both  to  the  soul  and  the  body.  He  sets  forth  the 
importance  of  the  consecration.  Tkrtuli.ian*  is  held  to  lean  toward 
a  symbolic  interpretation  of  the  Sacrament,  but  it  is  not  very  evident, 
because  he  refers  to  Jer.  11:  19  in  the  Septuagint,  where  the  Jews 
say:  "Come,  let  us  put  wood  upon  his  bread."  He  states  that  this 
passage  undoubtedly  has  reference  to  the  body  of  Christ,  inasmuch  as 
God  reveals  this  in  the  Gospels  where  the  bread  is  called  His  body. 
Tertullian  says  that  the  tree  is  the  cross  and  the  bread  the  body  of 
Christ.  He  sets  forth  that  Christ  explained  this  mystery  in  the  Lord's 
Supper.  The  bread  of  the  prophet  is  identified  as  the  bread  of  the 
Sacrament.  Since  the  one  is  His  true  body,  i.  e.,  Christ's,  so  is  also 
the  other.  Cyprian  was  the  first  to  set  forth  the  Lord's  Supper  as  a 
sacrifice  in  the  real  sense.  At  that  time  it  was  customary  in  the 
Communion  prayers  to  pray  for  the  Christians  who  were  dead,  and 
in  this  manner  the  way  was  prepared  for  the  masses  for  the  dead. 
Origk.n  looked  upon  the  Supper  as  a  symbolic  act. 

Er.sKiuus  OF  C.ksarea-,  Basil  and  Gregory  of  Naziaxzis  favored  the 
spiritualistic  or  figurative  view  of  the  Lord's  Supper.  Gregory  of 
Nyzza  says  that  the  bread  and  the  wine  are  transformed  into  the  body 
and  the  blood  of  Christ,  but  he  regards  the  transformation  as  being 
analogous  to  the  incarnation  of  Christ.  Cvrii,  of  jKKi\sALE.\r  compares 
the  transformation  in  the  Lord's  Supper  to  the  changing  of  the  water 
to  wine  at  Cana.  He  does  not  have  in  mind  the  change  implied  in 
transubstantiation.  Amhrose  also  speaks  of  a  change,  saying:  "When 
we  receive  the  bread  and  the  cup  we  receive  and  partake  of  the  body 
of  Christ."  He  also  sets  forth  the  significance  of  the  consecration  and 
how  the  Word  of  God  produces  the  Sacrament.  C^RY.'^osTo^r,  who  held 
a  realistic  view  of  the  Sacrament,  says:  "That  which  is  in  the  cup  is 
the  same  as  that  which  flowed  from  His  side,  and  of  this  we  become 
partakers."  Ai'uistink  taught  that  the  Lord's  Supper  consists  of  two 
species,  the  one  visible,  the  other  invisible,  as  the   person  of  Christ 

♦  Adv.  Marcion,  III,  XIX. 


THE  LORD  S    STTPPER.  405 

consists  of  God  and  man.  He  also  speaks  of  the  Sacrament  from  the 
symbolic  viewpoint,  although  he  did  not  consider  it  simply  as  a 
memorial.  Theodoret  pointed  out  that  Judas  also  received  the  body 
and  the  blood  of  Christ.  He  advocated  in  a  modified  form  the  theory 
of  consubstantiation  to  be  apprehended  by  faith.  Leo  the  Great  speaks 
of  manducatio  oralis.  Gelasius  and  Gregory  the  Great  advocated  the 
doctrine  of  a  transformation.  John  of  Damascus  taught  as  follows: 
"As  the  body  is  united  with  the  Logos,  so  we  are  united  with  Him 
(Christ)  through  the  bread.  The  Lord's  Supper  is  a  real  communion 
because  through  the  same  we  commune  with  Christ  and  become  par- 
takers of  His  body." 

Paschasius  Radbertus  taught  that  the  bread  and  the  wine  are  trans- 
formed and  simply  appear  to  be  bread  and  wine.  An  absorption  takes 
place  which  obliterates  the  substance  of  the  earthly  elements.  The 
transformation  involves  a  potential  creation.  However,  he  denied  an 
oral  eating  and  drinking  in  the  sense  that  the  body  of  Christ  was 
masticated  with  the  teeth.  His  theory  of  transformation  contains 
nevertheless  an  inconsistency,  inasmuch  as  he  declares  that  the  un- 
believers receive  only  bread  and  wine.  Ratbamnus  taught  that  the 
bread  and  the  wine  are  only  in  a  figurative  sense  the  body  and  the 
blood  of  Christ.  Rabaxus  Max'rus  and  Scotus  Erigexa  held  the  same 
view.  Berexgar  also  combatted  the  position  of  Paschasius  and  adopted 
a  figurative  interpretation.  Hh-debert  of  Tours  used  the  term  tran- 
substantiation.  Laxfkaxk  developed  the  doctrine  of  transubstantia- 
tion,  set  forth  the  whole  presence  of  Christ  and  taught  that  the  unbe- 
lievers become  partakers  of  the  body  and  blood  of  Christ.  Guitmund 
taught  that  the  whole  body  of  Christ  is  present  in  the  host  and  in 
every  part  of  it.  Axselm  supported  the  doctrine  of  transubstantiation 
together  with  the  view  that  the  whole  Christ  is  imparted  in  all  places 
wheresoever  the  Lord's  Supper  is  celebrated.  The  whole  Christ,  both 
as  to  His  divine  and  human  nature,  is  present  in  both  elements.  Peter 
Lombard  taught  the  same  and  considered  that  only  bread  was  neces- 
sary in  the  celebration  of  the  Sacrament.  Lnxocent  IH.  sanctioned 
the  doctrine  of  transubstantiation  in  1215.  Thomas  Aquixas  taught 
that  transubstantiation  was  effected  by  means  of  a  special  inherent 
power  in  the  consecration.  That  the  bread  and  the  wine  retained  their 
accidental  properties  was  dependent  on  the  power  of  God.  The  body 
of  Christ  is  to  be  found  in  every  small  particle  of  the  bread.  He  also 
speaks  of  a  sacrifice  that  is  offered  by  the  priest.  Occam  taught  that 
the  body  of  Christ  is  to  be  found  in  the  host  in  a  definitive  and  not 
in  a  circumscriptive  sense.  Gabrieu  Biel  stated  that  transubstantia- 
tion took  place  by  reason  of  the  divine  power  which  was  imparted  to 
the  words  of  institution  at  the  time  of  the  institution  of  the  Lord's 
Supper.  He  also  said  that  a  succession  takes  place  in  the  Sacrament, 
the  substance  of  the  bread  and  the  wine  being  succeeded  by  the  body 

Dogmatics.     16. 


466  Kcri.K.sioi.o(;Y. 

and  blood  of  Christ.  The  Roman  Catholic  doctrine  of  the  Lord's  Sup- 
l)er  contains,  therefore,  tlie  following  points:  1)  transubstantiatio,  or 
that  through  the  consecration  the  substance  of  the  bread  and  the  wine 
is  transformed  into  the  substanec  of  the  body  and  the  blood  of  Christ, 
so  that  it  is  not  necessary  for  Christ  to  descend  to  the  earth. 
The  accidents  of  the  bread  and  the  wine  remain,  however,  and  this  is 
regarded  as  a  special  miracle;  2)  de  concomitantia.  This  doctrine 
implies  that  the  whole  Christ  is  present  in  both  the  bread  and  the 
wine,  so  that  each  element  is  both  the  body  and  blood  of  Christ; 
3)  communio  sub  una  specie,  or  that  the  cup  is  withheld  from  the 
laity.  The  officiating  priest  drinks  of  the  cup,  but  when  he  himself 
communes,  he  receives  only  the  bread.  Only  the  cardinals  receive  both 
elements,  when  the  Pope  himself  officiates  on  Holy  Thursday;  4)  the 
Lord's  Supper  as  a  sacrificium,  or  the  repetition  of  the  sacrifice  of 
Christ;  5)  the  adoration  of  the  host;  6)  the  effect  of  the  Lord's 
Supper  produced  ex  opere  operate.  Its  celebration  is  considered  a 
meritorious  deed;  7)  faith  is  not  sufficient  for  a  suitable  preparation 
for  the  Lord's  Supper;  good  works  are  likewise  necessary. 

Li'THEK  wrote  several  works  on  the  Lord's  Supper,  but  his  doctrine 
of  the  Sacrament  appears  for  the  first  time  in  a  more  developed  form 
In  the  year  1528,  in  the  work  entitled,  "Das  grosse  Bekentniss  vom 
Abendmahl,"  in  which  he  sets  forth  the  doctrine  of  the  omnipresence 
of  God  and  Christ.  He  also  stated  that  the  "right  hand"  of  God  is 
everywhere,  that  the  Word  of  God  is  firm  and  certain  and  that  there 
are  many  modes  in  which  God  may  be  present.  He  defines  the  dif- 
ference between  the  circumscriptive,  the  definitive,  and  the  repletive 
presence.  The  definitive  presence  is  the  spiritual  mode  in  which  God 
is  present  in  the  Lord's  Supper.  He  rejects  the  theories  of  impanation 
and  consubstantiation  and  calls  the  union  of  the  elements  sacramental. 
He  regards  the  use  of  the  word  "this"  in  the  words  of  the  institution 
as  being  a  synecdoche.  He  taught  that  all  the  communicants  receive 
the  body  and  the  blood  of  Christ.  For  further  reference  see  his  cate- 
chisms. ZwiNcjLi  considered  the  Lord's  Supper  as  a  memorial  and  as 
a  feast  of  confession  and  thanksgiving.  The  word  "is"  in  the  words 
of  the  institution  is  equivalent  to  "signifies"  or  "symbolizes."  Zwingli 
declares  that  he  became  convinced  that  such  was  the  case  through  a 
revelation  or  a  dream  concerning  the  meaning  of  Ex.  12:  11,  which 
reads:  "It  is  Jehovah's  passover."  The  subject  "it"  in  this  passage 
refers  to  the  lamb,  while  the  verb  "is"'  is  equivalent  to  "symbolizes." 
But  the  verb  is  not  expressed  in  the  original  text,  but  has  to  be  sup- 
plied, and  in  such  case  cannot  have  the  meaning  that  Zwingli  ascribes 
to  it.  Furthermore,  the  subject  "it"  in  this  passage  denotes  the  whole 
complex  action  and  not  merely  the  lamb.  OEcoi..v.MP.\Dirs  accepted  the 
symbolical  view  of  the  Sacrament  and  interpreted  the  word  body  by 
metonymy  as  a  sign  of  the  body.    Calvix  says  that  the  bread  and  wine 


THE  lord's  sltper.  467 

in  the  Sacrament  are  assurances  that  the  Lord  imparts  still  greater 
gifts  through  the  bread  and  wine.  There  is  a  potency  that  proceeds 
from  the  glorified  body  of  Christ.  The  body  of  Christ  cannot  actually 
be  present  in  the  Lord's  Supper.  The  impartation  of  the  power  of 
Christ  is  mediated  through  the  Holy  Spirit.  On  the  human  side  the 
reception  of  the  divine  gift  of  the  Sacrament  is  mediated  through  faith. 
The  unbelievers  receive  only  bread  and  wine.  Melaxchthox  taught 
that  the  body  and  the  blood  of  Christ  are  presented  with  the  bread 
and  wine.  In  the  Variata  we  read:  "Concerning  the  Lord's  Supper 
we  teach  that  with  the  bread  and  wine  the  body  and  blood  of  Christ 
are  truly  presented  (exhibeantur )  to  those  that  participate  in  the 
Lord's  Supper."  He  rejected  the  Lutheran  expressions  vere  adsint  et 
distribuantur.  He  declared  that  Christ  was  present  in  the  sacramental 
action,  and  made  use  of  the  word  cum  as  signifying  the  connection 
between  the  elements,  but  the  bread  and  wine  are  not  vehicles  of  the 
heavenly  elements.  The  most  important  thing  in  the  Lord's  Supper 
is  the  living  communion  with  Christ.  Schwenkfeld  reversed  the 
order  in  the  words  of  the  institution,  making  the  subject  the  predicate, 
and  vice  versa,  the  sentence  reading,  "My  body  is  this."  John  Scaijgek 
taught  that  even  before  the  distribution,  and  therefore  independent 
of  the  distribution,  the  body  and  blood  of  Christ  are  united  with  the 
bread  and  the  wine  through  the  consecration.  The  Formula  of  Concord 
confirms  the  expressions  of  the  other  Confessions  and  clearly  sets 
forth  the  real  and  substantial  presence  together  with  its  corollaries, 
manducatio  oralis  and  communio  impiorum.  In,  cum  and  stih  are 
employed  for  the  purpose  of  saying  that  the  earthly  elements  are  real 
vehicles  of  the  heavenly  elements,  as  well  as  for  combatting  the 
Catholic  doctrine  of  transubstantiation  on  the  one  hand,  and  the  spirit- 
ualizing tendencies  of  the  Reformed  Church  on  the  other.  The  doc- 
trine of  the  Lord's  Supper  is  made  clear  through  the  doctrine  of  the 
person  of  Christ.  It  is  stated  that  the  body  and  blood  are  in  coena 
Domini,  but  the  use  is  emphasized.  For  further  reference,  see  the 
Formula  of  Concord,  chapter  VII,  both  the  affirmative  and  negative 
declarations.  The  Socinians  deal  with  the  Lord's  Supper  as  a  me- 
morial. The  subject  "this"  in  the  words  of  the  institution  refers  to 
the  breaking  of  the  bread  and  the  pouring  of  the  wine.  The  Arminians 
taught  the  same  with  regard  to  the  significance  of  the  Lord's  Supper 
as  a  memorial  and  a  confession.  The  soul  is  nourished  spiritually  by 
the  body  and  blood  of  Christ. 

The  Rationalists  deny  the  real  presence  of  Christ.  At  the  first 
Supper  the  disciples  could  not  indeed  believe  that  the  body  and  blood 
of  Christ  were  imparted.  The  doctrine  of  the  Lord's  Supper  which 
is  taught  in  the  orthodox  Church  has  come  about  through  the  dreams 
of  the  Scholastics.  The  Supra7ia turalists  departed  from  the  Lutheran 
doctrine  of  the  Lord's  Supper  and  reduced  the  presence  of  Christ  to  a 


468  ECCLESIOLOGY. 

general  and  operative  presence,  just  as  the  sun  produces  its  effects 
upon  us  without  being  near  us.  Kant  believed  that  the  object  of  the 
Lord's  Supper  was  to  unite  mankind  into  a  mundane  ethical  society, 
thereby  awakening  the  spirit  of  brotherly  love  among  men.  Schleikk- 
.M.UHEK  emphasized  the  living  communion  with  Christ,  which  com- 
munion was  strengthened  through  the  Lord's  Supper  as  against  the 
baleful  influences  of  the  world.  Kahms  did  not  support  the  strictly 
Lutheran  position  on  the  Lord's  Supper.  At  the  same  time  he  rejected 
the  Zwinglian  interpretation  of  the  verb  "is"  in  the  words  of  the 
institution.  He  says  that  the  bread  and  the  wine  are  not  simply 
symbols  but  media,  by  means  of  which  through  the  Holy  Spirit  we 
appropriate  unto  ourselves  the  glorified  humanity  of  Christ,  but  not 
that  we  immediately  eat  and  drink  the  body  and  blood  of  Christ.  The 
body  of  Christ  communicated  in  the  Supper  is  eucharistic.  The  eating 
and  drinking  are  spiritual.  He  endeavors  to  combine  the  views  of 
Luther,  Zwingli  and  Calvin.  Martexsex  says  that  the  whole  Christ 
and  the  power  of  His  resurrection  are  to  be  found  in  the  two  earthly 
elements.  The  Lord's  Supper  is  not  simply  a  memorial,  nor  yet  an 
earnest  and  assurance,  but  it  is  a  true  union  with  Christ  which  is  the 
principle  of  the  marriage  between  the  Spirit  and  nature.  The  nourish- 
ment provided  in  the  Lord's  Supper  also  exercises  its  influence  on  the 
future  resurrection  body.  Thomasius  sets  forth  the  effect  of  the  Lord's 
Supper  both  in  a  bodily  and  spiritual  sense.  Since,  in  accordance  with 
1  Cor.  11:  28 — 32  (especially  v.  30),  the  unworthy  participation  in  the 
Lord's  Supper  brought  about  such  judgments  as  bodily  sickness  and 
even  death,  therefore  a  worthy  participation  must  bring  God's  blessing 
and  exercise  a  wholesome  influence  upon  the  whole  man.  Schartau 
says  in  relation  to  a  worthy  participation  in  the  Lord's  Supper  that 
all  that  is  necessary  for  the  seeker  after  salvation  is  to  have  experi- 
enced the  first  enlightenment  of  the  Holy  Spirit,  which  implies  a 
desire  to  hear  and  read  the  Word  of  God  together  with  an  initial 
faith  and  desire  to  participate  in  the  Holy  Supper.  Bielixg  distin- 
guishes between  the  spiritual  and  the  sacramental  eating  in  the  Lord's 
Supper  and  declares  that  the  former  is  necessary  in  order  that  we  may 
receive  the  Sacrament  worthily  and  enjoy  its  benefits.  He  states  that 
the  spiritual  eating  is  necessary,  not  because  this  mode  of  eating  con- 
stitutes the  Holy  Supper  a  Sacrament,  but  in  order  that  the  Sacrament 
may  prove  a  blessing  to  the  communicant.  That  which  makes  a  man 
worthy  in  his  participation  of  the  Lord's  Supper  is  faith  and  nothing 
but  faith.  He  adds  that  the  degree  of  faith,  whether  it  be  weak  or 
strong,  does  not  constitute  a  criterion  of  worthines.-^,  inasmuch  as  it 
is  not  the  quality  or  the  degree  of  faith  which  renders  a  communicant 
worthy;  rather  that  Avhich  makes  worthy  is  to  be  found  in  the  merit 
of  Christ,  which  is  appropriated  by  faith,  by  the  strong  faith  no  more 
than  by  the  weak  faith.  Bring  says  that  in  the  Lord's  Supper  are 
communicated  the  same  body  and  blood  as  constituted  the  human  or 


THE   OFFICE   OF   THE    MINISTRY.  469 

bodily  side  of  the  person  of'Christ  while  He  sojourned  here  upon  earth, 
but  in  the  condition  of  a  glorified  body  and  a  glorified  blood.  The  fact 
that  the  body  and  blood  are  glorified  marks  them  off  as  being  per- 
meated with  spirit,  life  and  light,  without  lacking  any  essential  thing 
which  belongs  to  any  bodily  substance.  The  union  of  the  elements, 
although  not  hypostatic,  may  nevertheless  be  compared  to  the  union 
W'hich  is  effected  between  the  divine  and  human  natures  of  Christ. 
As  they  are  received  the  body  and  the  blood  of  Christ  are  indissolubly 
and  inseparably,  yet  without  mixture  or  transformation,  united 
with  the  bread  and  wine.  With  regard  to  the  purpose  of  the  Sacra- 
ment he  states  that  not  only  are  spiritual-bodily  gifts  imparted,  but 
through  their  mediation  spiritual-bodily  effects  are  also  produced.  In 
like  manner  as  the  atoning  work  of  Christ  and  the  Holy  Spirit's  work 
of  sanctification  embrace  the  whole  of  man,  so  the  gifts  which  are 
communicated  in  the  Lord's  Supper  affect  not  only  the  soul,  but  also 
the  body.  The  new  life  produced  in  Baptism,  both  the  spiritual  and 
the  bodily,  is  nourished  and  strengthened.  The  Lord's  Supper  like- 
wise produces  its  effect  on  the  seed  of  life  which  in  the  resurrection 
unites  the  old  body  with  the  new.  Bring  does  not  assert  that  this  can 
be  proved,  but  he  gives  it  as  his  dogmatic  opinion.  With  regard  to 
the  spiritual  effect  of  the  Lord's  Supper  in  strengthening  the  spiritual 
relationship  with  Christ  he  says  that  as  the  branch  continuously 
receives  new  life  from  the  vine,  thereby  becoming  more  powerfully 
attached  to  and  imbedded  in  the  vine,  so  the  believer's  union  with 
Christ  is  strengthened  and  the  new  life  grows  in  breadth  and  length 
and  depth  and  height.  He  holds  forth  faith  as  the  condition  of  en- 
joying the  blessing  of  the  Lord's  Supper,  but  remarks  that  faith  may 
be  only  longing  and  hungering. 


§39.     THE  OFFICE  OF  THE  MINISTRY. 

The  Lord  has  not  only  given  to  the  Church  the  Word  of 
God  and  the  Sacraments,  but  He  has  also  provided  for  their 
administration  and  therefore  established  the  office  of  the 
ministry.  The  ministry  is  therefore  not  a  human  institu- 
tion, nor  is  it  a  provision  made  by  the  Church  by  reason 
of  the  requirements  of  the  situation.  The  ministry  arose 
with  the  Church  and  the  Church  with  the  ministry,  but  the 
ministry  is  not  extraneous  to  the  Church  and  independent 
of  it,  rather  it  is  found  within  the  Church  and  belongs  to  it. 
The  existence  of  the  ministry  is,  however,  not  dependent 
on  any  decision  of  the  Church ;  it  is  a  permanent  institution 


470  ixci,Ksu)i.o(;Y. 

in  the  same  sense  as  the  Church  itselt.  While  therefore  the 
Church  as  the  subject  of  the  ministry  is  the  medium  through 
which  the  perpetuity  of  the  ministry  is  mediated,  still  the 
ministry  forms  such  an  integral  part  of  the  life  of  the 
Church  that  a  normal  Church  cannot  be  found  without  the 
office  of  the  ministry. 

1.  Definition  of  the  Ministry. 

The  ministry  is  that  office  instituted  bjj  the  Lord  to 
ivhich  He  has  entrusted  the  administration  of  the  means  of 
grace,  in  which  office,  through  the  mediation  of  the  Church 
by  means  of  ordination,  suitable  and  educated  men  are 
placed  ivho  shall  devote  all  their  poivers  to  the  upbuilding 
of  the  Church  and  to  the  glory  of  God.  Baier  defines  the 
office  of  the  ministry  as  follows:*  "Ministerium  ecclesiasti- 
cum  is  the  public  office  instituted  by  God  in  which  certain 
persons,  legally  called  and  ordained,  teach  the  Word  of  God, 
administer  the  Sacraments,  remit  and  retain  sins,  care  for 
and  arrange  for  other  matters  in  the  work  of  the  Church, 
unto  the  conversion,  sanctification  and  eternal  salvation  of 
men."  Causa  efficients  principalis  is  the  Triune  God  and 
especially  Christ.  Causa  minus  principalis  is  the  Church 
of  Christ. 

2.  The  Call  to  the  Ministry. 

1)  Necessitas  vocationis.  The  14th  article  of  the  Augs- 
burg Confession  contains  the  following  declaration  with 
regard  to  the  necessity  of  the  call :  "Of  Ecclesiastical  Order, 
they  teach,  that  no  one  should  publicly  teach  in  the  Church 
or  administer  the  Sacraments,  unless  he  be  regularly  called." 
In  the  administration  of  the  office  of  the  ministry  it  is  not 
sufficient  to  belong  to  the  universal  priesthood  of  believers, 
although  no  one  should  be  called  to  the  ministry  who  is  not 
a  spiritual  priest.  All  Christians,  men  and  women,  old  or 
young,  are  spiritual  priests,  but  they  do  not  therefore  pos- 
sess the  right  to  administer  the  means  of  grace,  even  if  they 
have  an  inner  call.    The  inner  call  must  be  confirmed  by  a 

*  C'onip.  Theol.  Posit.    Pars  III,  Cap.  xiv,  §15. 


THE  OFFICE  OF  THE   MINISTRY.  471 

regular  external  call.  No  one  can  call  himself.  The  call  is 
necessitas  absoluta  and  therefore  essential  in  the  exercise 
of  the  office  of  the  ministry. 

2)  Attributa  vocaUonis:  a)  interna  et  externa;  b)  im- 
mediata  et  mediata.  God  has  called  immediately  and  can 
do  so.  However,  this  immediate  call  belongs  to  extraordi- 
nary epochs  and  has  reference  to  the  performance  of  special 
tasks,  as  when  the  Lord  called  prophets,  apostles  and  evan- 
gelists, but  there  is  no  example  of  the  Lord  calling  a  man 
immediately  to  the  ordinary  office  of  the  ministry.  As  a 
rule,  therefore,  the  call  is  externa  et  mediata.  The  Church 
is  the  medium  through  which  the  call  is  extended.  Indi- 
vidual members  cannot  extend  a  call,  except  in  extraordi- 
nary cases,  which  very  seldom  occur;  and  where  they  do 
occur,  the  sanction  of  the  Church  must  be  secured  as  soon 
as  circumstances  permit.  The  exceptions  form  no  pre- 
cedent. HOLLAZius  says:*  "We  must  distinguish  between 
the  right  to  call  ministers  and  the  exercise  of  the  right.  The 
right  to  call  belongs  to  the  whole  Church,  and  all  its  ranks 
and  members.  But  the  exercise  of  the  right  varies,  ac- 
cording to  the  diverse  agreement  and  custom  of  the  par- 
ticular Church." 

3)  Partes  vocationis:  a)  electio,  or  the  choosing  of  such 
as  have  the  necessary  qualifications,  so  that  through  studies 
and  a  proper  training  they  may  be  prepared  for  a  possible 
call  to  the  office  of  the  ministry ;  b)  vocatio  specialis,  or 
the  external  call  from  a  congregation  or  authorized  Church 
body;  c)  ordinatio,  through  which  the  call  is  confirmed  by 
the  whole  Church  of  God,  thereby  making  certain  the  fact 
that  the  candidate  is  truly  rite  vocatus. 

Compare  the  following  Scripture  passages :  Acts  1 :  15, 
24 ;  13  :  3 ;  Rom.  10  :  15  ;  Acts  14  :  23  ;  Eph.  4 :  11,  12  ;  1  Tim. 
3 :  1—7 ;  4 :  14 ;  2  Tim.  2:2;  Titus  1 :  5.  These  passages 
set  forth  clearly  that  there  prevailed  a  fixed  order  in  the 
Church  from  the  beginning.  The  incumbents  of  the  office 
of  the  ministry  were  called  to  this  service  after  necessary 
examination,  while  the  office  was  entrusted  to  them  in  a 

*  Exam.  Theol.  Acroam.     Pars  IV,  Cap.  ii.  Qu.  7,  p.  864. 


472  ECCLESIOLOQY, 

formal  way  which  we  call  ordination.  Even  the  seven 
deacons  were  inducted  into  their  office  (Acts  6:6).  In 
accordance,  therefore,  with  the  Word  of  God  and  the  four- 
teenth article  of  the  Augsburg  Confession  those  that  pub- 
licly teach  and  preach  are  to  be  rite  vocati.  With  reference 
to  the  use  of  the  so-called  lay  preaching  it  is  necessary  for 
the  Church  as  the  subject  of  the  ministry  to  arrange  for 
such  activities.  The  Schmalkald  Articles  state  that  laymen 
may  be  used  in  canu  necessitatis. 

3.    More  Precise  Definition  of  Ordination. 

1)  Gerhard  defines  ordination  as  follows:*  "Oi'dinatio 
is  a  public  and  solemn  declaration  or  attestation,  through 
which  the  ministry  of  the  Church  is  committed  to  a  suitable 
person  called  thereto  by  the  Church,  to  which  he  is  conse- 
crated by  prayer  and  the  laying  on  of  hands,  rendered  rnore 
certain  of  his  lawful  call,  and  publicly,  in  the  sight  of  the 
entire  Church,  solemnly  and  seriously  admonished  concern- 
ing his  duty."  Ordination  does  not  induct  the  ordained 
pastor  into  an  ordo  with  a  character  indelebilis,  but  con- 
stitutes the  official  confirmation  of  the  call  and  sets  the 
ordained  apart  as  a  minister  ecclesiae. 

2)  Necessitas  ordinationis  is  relative,  but  ordination  is  not 
a  matter  of  indifference,  inasmuch  as  it  is  based  on  Biblical 
ground.  Of  course,  it  is  also  based  on  the  symbols  of  the 
Church.  In  these  the  conception  of  ordination  is  modified 
by  the  conception  of  the  ministry,  while  the  conception  of 
the  latter  is  in  turn  dependent  on  the  conception  of  the 
Church.  The  fifth  article  of  the  Augsburg  Confession  sets 
forth  the  divine  origin  of  the  ministry  and  the  functions 
necessary  for  the  obtaining  of  faith,  while  the  fourteenth 
article  states  expressly  that  the  holders  of  the  office  of  the 
ministry  must  be  rite  vocati.  A  comparison  of  articles 
VII  and  XV  will  show  that  the  Confession  is  conservative 
with  regard  to  ritus,  but  also  truly  liberal.  The  conserva- 
tism of  the  Confession  makes  clearly  manifest  the  fact  that 

*  Gerh.  Loci  Theol.,  Tomus  VI,  Sec.  XII,  p.  97  seu  XI I,  145. 


THE   OFFICE   OF   THE    MINISTRY,  473 

our  Church  earnestly  desired  to  retain  the  usages  of  the 
Apostolic  Church.  Compare  article  XIII  (7)  3,  11,  12, 
where  ordination  by  means  of  the  imposition  of  hands  is 
in  a  certain  sense  looked  upon  as  a  Sacrament. 

3)  The  different  parts  of  the  act  of  ordination:  a)  con- 
fession; b)  the  making  of  vows;  c)  consecration  through 
the  Word  of  God  and  prayer,  or  Einsegnung,  as  the  German 
theologians  express  it.  Of  course,  this  is  not  consecration 
and  sanctification  in  the  ordinary  sense.  Spiritual  sancti- 
ficat\on  \z  a  Drerequisite,  inasmuch  as  only  a  spiritual  priest 
is  to  Jbe  ordai:ied  as  a  minister  ecclesise.  The  consecration 
has  reference  o  the  setting  apart  for  the  work  of  the 
ministry.  The  Word  and  promises  of  God  occupy  a  central 
place  in  ordination  and  really  are  constituent  elements  in 
the  ordination.  The  ordination  prayer  establishes  the  con- 
nection between  the  Word  of  God  and  the  laying  on  of 
hands;  d)  the  imposition  of  hands  after  the  official  com- 
mitment of  the  office  of  the  ministry.  The  ordained  servant 
of  God  is  set  apart  through  this  symbolical  act  for  the 
service  of  the  Lord,  while  the  content  of  the  Word  of  God 
and  prayer  is  applied  upon  him. 

4)  The  x^/oi^o-^a  of  ordination.  We  may  say  that  this  is 
a  special  divine  gift  or  blessing  to  be  used  in  the  discharge 
of  the  office  of  the  ministry.  This  gift  or  blessing  must  be 
conserved  through  the  study  of  the  Word  and  prayer.  It  is 
vitally  important  continuously  to   åva^<DTrvptiv  to  xapto'M". 

In  1  Tim.  4 :  14  we  read :  "Neglect  not  the  gift  that  is  in 
thee,  which  was  given  thee  by  prophecy,  with  the  laying  on 
of  the  hands  of  the  presbytery."  The  Word  of  God  contains 
many  promises  which  apply  to  ministers.  We  should  study 
those  passages.  All  these  promises  belong  to  the  "proph- 
ecy." The  Lord  endows  every  pastor  with  some  gift.  Min- 
isters should  "stir  up  the  gift  of  God"  (2  Tim.  1:6).  The 
prayer  at  ordination  was  not  in  vain,  but  ministers  should 
take  care  of  its  blessing.  The  office  committed  to  a  pastor 
is  also  a  gift  and  the  highest  calling  on  earth.  "Be  diligent 
in  these  things;  give  thyself  wholly  to  them,"  etc.  (1  Tim. 
4:15,16. 


474  KtCLESIOI.OdY. 

HOLLAZius  says  that  in  the  first  place  ordination  is  a 
public  declaration  and  a  solemn  confirmation  of  the  fact 
that  the  candidate  for  ordination  is  legally  called.  Through 
ordination,  however,  he  is  placed  not  only  before  the  entire 
congregation  but  also  before  the  sight  of  God  and  set  apart 
from  all  earthly  business  and  ordained  as  a  servant  of  God, 
The  commitment  of  the  office  stands  in  the  closest  relation- 
ship with  the  imposition  of  hands,  which  is  a  sign  of  the 
divine  blessing  for  the  special  task. 

4.     POTESTAS  MiNISTERII  ECCLESIASTICI. 

Dogmaticians  present  the  following  poin+  as  constituting 
the  content  of  this  potestas:  1)  puhlice  docendi,  or  the 
public  teaching;  2)  sacramenta  ordinarie  administrandi,  or 
the  administration  of  the  Sacraments;  3)  munus  remittendi 
et  retinendi  peccata,  or  the  power  of  the  keys.  The  first 
two  points  constitute  potestas  ordinis,  and  the  third  point 
is  called  potestas  jurisdictionis  seu  clavium.  In  a  certain 
sense  we  may  say  that  the  potestas  clavium  belongs  to  the 
potestas  ordinis,  but  not  from  the  standpoint  of  church 
polity.  In  the  last  instance,  as  in  case  of  appeal,  the  potestas 
jurisdictionis  belongs  to  the  common  or  general  Church 
council,  whatever  it  may  be  in  different  Churches. 

With  'regard  to  the  potestas  clavium  the  following  is 
quoted  from  HOLLAZius:*  "The  power  which  ministers  of 
the  Church  have  to  remit  sins  is  not  absolute  ( avroKparopiKij^ . 
or  principal  and  independent  (which  belongs  to  God  alone, 
against  whom  alone  sin  is  committed),  but  ministerial  and 
delegated  (  Siokovikt/ ) ,  by  which  to  contrite  and  penitent  sin- 
ners they  remit  all  sins  without  any  reservation  of  guilt  or 
punishment,  not  only  by  way  of  signification  and  declara- 
tion, but  also  effectually  and  really,  yet  öpyuviK-ws  (instru- 
mentally) ." 

5.    The  Object  of  the  Ministry. 

Finis  ministerii  ecclesiastici  is  divided  as  follows:  1)  finiJ^ 
proximiis,   which   is  the   reconciliation   of  men   with   God 

*  Exam.  Theol.  Acroam.     Pars  IV.  Cap.  ii.  Qu.  20,  p.  878. 


THE   OFFICE   OF   THE    illXISTRY.  475 

through  faith  in  Christ  with  all  that  is  connected  therewith ; 
2)  firiis  ultimus,  or  the  eternal  salvation  of  men  to  the  glory 
of  God.  The  fifth  article  of  the  Augsburg  Confession  sets 
forth  finis  proximus,  inasmuch  as  it  is  there  stated  that  the 
office  of  the  ministry  is  instituted  in  order  that  men  may 
obtain  faith.  The  words  read  as  follows:  "That  we  may 
obtain  this  faith,  the  office  of  teaching  the  Gospel  and  ad- 
ministering the  Sacraments  was  instituted.  For  through 
the  Word  and  the  Sacraments  as  through  instruments,  the 
Holy  Ghost  is  given,  who  worketh  faith."  Of  course,  finis 
ultimus  is  also  connected  herewith,  inasmuch  as  the  serv- 
ants of  the  Lord  not  only  labor  that  men  may  obtain  faith, 
but  also  that  their  souls  may  be  preserved  in  faith  unto  the 
end  and  that  they  might  gain  the  final  object  of  their  faith 
or  eternal  salvation.  Compare  2  Cor.  5 :  20 ;  11 :  2;  12:  15 ; 
Gal.  4:  19;  Eph.  4:  11—16;  1  Tim.  4:  16. 

6.  Notes  on  the  History  of  Dogma. 
The  Apostolic  Church  did  not  lack  an  ordered  ministry, 
although  many  of  the  members  were  possessed  of  special 
charismatic  gifts.  In  conjunction  with  the  congregation? 
the  Apostles  appointed  elders  in  the  Churches  who  were  the 
pastors.  In  accordance  with  the  usage  of  the  Jewish  lan- 
guage the  pastors  were  called  elders  or  presbyters,  and  in 
accordance  with  the  usage  of  the  Greek  they  were  called 
bishops.  After  the  death  of  the  Apostles  it  happened,  ac- 
cording to  natural  development,  that  certain  presbyters 
occupied  more  prominent  positions  than  others.  In  many 
congregations  there  were  several  presbyters,  wherefore 
naturally  one  of  them  would  become  the  leader  as  a  primus 
inter  pares.  Titus  as  an  evangelist  had  the  oversight  of 
several  congregations,  and  by  reason  of  this  fact  we  possess 
the  Biblical  example  of  a  sort  of  superintendency,  which 
indeed  may  also  be  found  in  the  general  oversight  exercised 
by  the  Apostles  themselves.  On  this  account  it  became 
customary  more  and  more  for  the  bishops  or  presbyters  in 
the  cities  and  prominent  mission  stations  to  become  the 
leaders  at  the  pastoral  conferences.     It  did  not  take  long 


476  ECCLESIOLOOY. 

before  they  also  were  charged  with  the  oversight  of  con- 
gregations in  the  smaller  neighboring  provinces,  in  conse- 
quence of  which  the  office  of  the  metropolitan  soon  came  to 
be  established,  followed  in  due  course  of  time  by  the  epis- 
copacy in  perfect  hierarchial  form.    While,  on  the  one  hand, 
the  Word  of  God  presents  the  office  of  the  presbyter  as 
being  identical  with  that  of  the  bishop,  the  historical  devel- 
opment, on  the  other  hand,  very  soon  tended  toward  the 
view  that  the  bishop  was  the  superior  of  the  presbyter  jure 
divino  and  not  simply  jure  humano.     Distinctions  in  rank 
became  the  order  of  the  day.     The  episcopal  structure  of 
Cyprian  lacked  a  capstone  which  was  nevertheless  soon  sup- 
plied in  the  Roman  primate.     The  Roman  Catholic  Church 
regards  the  office  of  the  ministry  from  the  point  of  view  of 
the  Old  Testament,  viz.,  as  a  sacerdotium.    Vast  importance 
is  attached  to  the  apostolic  succession  mediated  through  the 
episcopal  ordination.     The  priests  are  mediators  between 
God   and   men.     The   Protestants   set   forth   the   universal 
priesthood  of  believers.    The- Lutheran  Church  made  proper 
distinctions  between  the  office  of  the  ministry  and  the  uni- 
versal priesthood  and  M^as  careful  not  to  emphasize  either 
to  the  detriment  of  the  other.     The  Ultra-Protestants  and 
fanatics  did  not  regard  the  office  of  the  ministry  properly, 
owing  to  their  false  conclusions  drawn  from  the  doctrine 
of  the  universal  priesthood.     The  call  was  an  inner  rather 
than  an  external  call  and  was  brought  about  through  the 
immediate  inspiration  of  the  Holy  Spirit.     The  position  of 
the  Lutheran  Confessions  is  conservative  with  regard  to  the 
ministry.     Since  the  Reformation  there  have  been  various 
tendencies  that  have  developed  with  regard  to  the  office  of 
the  ministry.     Of  course,  the  Roman  Catholic  Church  has 
been  faithful  to  its  fixed  opinions.     Among  the  Reformed 
Protestants  there  are  to  be  found  Romanizing  tendencies, 
but  the  majority  of  the  denominations  lean  more  decidedly 
to  the  "left"  than  to  the  "right."    The  Lutheran  Church  has 
also  been  faithful  to  its  principles,  although  some  of  her 
theologians  have  inclined  more  toward  high  Church  tenden- 
cies, while  others  have  inclined  in  the  opposite  direction. 


THE  OFFICE  OF  THE   MINISTRY.  477 

As  a  rule,  however,  the  office  is  highly  regarded,  in  accord- 
ance with  the  Word  of  God,  but  not  more  highly  than  the 
Scriptures  warrant 

Clement  of  Rome  states  that  the  Apostles  appointed  the  elders,  but 
when  the  congregations  had  become  organized,  the  appointments  were 
made  in  conjunction  with  the  latter.  Bishop  and  presbyter  were  dif- 
ferent designations  for  the  same  office.  Polycarp  also  testifies  that  the 
offices  of  bishop  and  presbyter  were  identical.  The  Didache,  or  the 
Teaching  of  the  Twelve  Apostles,  speaks  in  the  XVth  chapter  of 
bishops  and  deacons.  The  reference  to  Phil.  1:  1  in  this  connection 
shows  that  the  term  bishop  was  used  interchangeably  with  presbyter  and 
therefore  was  identical  with  it.  Ignatius  speaks  of  the  office  of  bishop 
in  his  seven  or  three  letters.  The  difficulty  is,  however,  that  there  are 
extant  three  editions  of  his  letters,  while  only  one  can  be  authentic, 
either  the  lesser  Greek  edition  or  the  recently  discovered  Syrian 
edition.  In  the  latter  the  references  to  the  episcopal  office  are  lacking, 
although  its  principal  features  may  be  traced.  In  his  letter  to  Rome 
the  episcopal  office  is  not  mentioned,  although  Ignatius  calls  himself 
the  bishop  of  Syria.  The  episcopacy,  of  which  he  speaks,  however,  is 
not  the  diocesan  episcopacy,  which  arose  later,  but  merely  the  office 
of  bishop  in  the  congregation.  He  states  that  the  congregational  bishop 
is  the  vicar  of  God  and  Christ,  while  the  presbyters  correspond  to  the 
Apostles.  He  also  speaks  of  the  office  of  the  deacon.  Justin  Martyr 
does  not  treat  of  this  subject  directly,  although  in  his  65th  and  67th 
apology  he  makes  mention  of  the  fact  that  in  the  Lord's  Supper  the 
officiating  pastor  consecrated  the  elements,  which  were  then  distributed 
by  the  deacons.  Prom  this  it  is  evident  that  the  office  of  the  ministry 
was  not  regarded  as  a  sacerdotal  office.  Iren.eus  speaks  of  the  dio- 
cesan episcopacy  as  being  a  continuation  of  the  apostolic  Church  and 
as  a  vehicle  of  the  Catholic  tradition.  In  his  writings,  however,  there 
is  some  confusion  as  to  the  use  of  the  terms  bishop  and  presbyter, 
which  proves  that  the  doctrine  concerning  them  was  not  as  yet  fixed. 
Tertullian  shared  the  same  views  before  he  became  a  Montanist.  He 
clearly  distinguishes  between  bishop  and  presbyter  as  well  as  between 
clerici  and  laici.  Cyprian  was  the  typical  representative  of  the  high- 
church  tendency  of  the  time.  He  says  that  the  bishop  is  in  the  Church 
and  the  Church  in  the  bishop,  wherefore  he  who  is  not  with  the 
bishop  is  not  a  member  of  the  Church.  The  bishop  is  God's  repre- 
sentative and  the  channel  which  transmits  the  grace  of  God.  He  is 
appointed  by  God,  is  inspired  by  God,  and  is  responsible  to  Him. 
Cyprian  sets  forth  in  its  main  outlines  the  whole  sacerdotal  system. 
In  accordance  with  his  conception  the  implication  is  that  he  regarded 
the  priest  as  a  sacrificial  priest.  Sacerdotalism  found  a  fruitful  soil 
among  the  heathen  Christians,  but  not  among  the  Jewish  Christians. 


478  KCCr.ES10T.0<;Y. 

who  knew  that  the  Old  Testament  Levitical  service  was  merely  typical 
and  would  cease  to  be  when  the  antitype  was  revealed.  They  also  knew 
that  the  Jewish  priesthood  did  not  correspond  to  the  New  Testament 
office  of  the  ministry. 

CiiKYsosTo.M  sets  forth  the  identity  of  bishop  and  presbyter  in  the 
Biblical  sense.  Jkko.mk  also  sets  forth  this  identity.  He  says:  "The 
Apostle  clearly  shows  that  presbyter  is  the  same  as  bishop.  It  is  most 
clearly  proven  that  bishops  and  presbyters  are  identical."  With  regard 
to  the  origin  of  the  episcopacy  he  states:  "When  in  the  course  of  time 
a  presbyter  was  elected  to  preside  over  others,  this  was  done  in  order 
to  provide  a  remedy  against  schism  and  in  order  that  each  one  might  not 
withdraw  and  surround  himself  with  supporters  and  thus  tear  asunder 
the  Church  of  Christ."  He  testifies  to  the  fact  that  the  presbyters 
officiated  at  the  ordination  of  pastors  and  were  afterwards  assisted 
by  the  bishops.  Aror.sTi.xK  says:*  "There  is  nothing  in  this  life  and 
especially  at  this  time  easier  and  more  delightful  and  desirable  than  to 
hold  the  office  of  a  bishop,  a  presbyter  or  a  deacon,  if  the  calling  be 
administered  superficially  and  to  the  pleasure  of  men,  but  there  is 
nothing  more  wretched,  mournful  and  damnable  in  the  sight  of  God. 
There  is  likewise  in  this  life  and  at  this  time  nothing  more  difficult, 
laborious  and  hazardous  than  to  occupy  the  office  of  a  bishop,  prebyter 
or  a  deacon,  and  yet  in  the  sight  of  God  there  is  nothing  more  blessed, 
provided  the  fight  is  fought  in  accordance  with  the  Captain's  com- 
mand." He  writes  to  Jerome:  "Although  the  honorable  titles,  which 
the  practice  of  the  Church  has  sanctioned,  place  the  office  of  the  bishop 
above  that  of  the  minister,  still  in  many  things  Augustine  is  smaller 
than  Jerome."  Although  Augustine  favored  the  episcopacy,  spoke 
highly  of  it,  and  called  Rome  especially  the  sedes  apostolica,  still 
there  are  to  be  found  expressions  in  his  writings  which  prove  that  he 
did  not  in  the  commonly  accepted  sense  support  the  doctrine  of  the 
so-called  apostolic  succession.  Augustine,  however,  supported,  the 
Catholic  doctrine  of  sacerdotalism  and  the  mediatory  office  of  the 
priesthood. 

Pktek  Lombard  presents  seven  clerical  orders:  Ostiarii,  lectores, 
exorcistae,  acoluthi,  subdiaconi,  diaconi  et  presbyteri.  Raimund  ok 
Sarv-xde  says  that  those  officiating  stand  in  the  same  relation  to  the 
Sacraments  as  the  parents  in  relation  to  the  birth  of  their  child.  They 
administer  the  externals  in  the  Sacraments,  and  God  imparts  the  inner 
gifts  of  grace,  just  as  the  parents  are  responsible  for  the  material 
body,  while  God  creates  the  soul.  Tho.ma.s  Aijiinas  sets  forth  the 
great  significance  of  ordination  in  relation  to  the  other  Sacraments. 
He  states  that  while  in  the  other  Sacraments  the  effect  is  dependent 
quod  divinam  virtutem  et  significat  et  continet,  in  this  Sacrament  the 
effect  is  dependent  on  the  person  who  performs  the  act  of  ordination 

♦  Epist.  XXI  ad  Valerium. 


THE   OFFICE   OF   THE    JrI^'ISTBY.  479 

]n  accordance  with  his  view  it  is  the  act  of  ordination  which  is  ma- 
terial in  constituting  tlie  rest.  Through  ordination  an  indelible 
character  is  imprinted.  The  Council  of  Trent  confirmed  the  doctrine 
as  it  had  been  developed.  The  Council  decided  that  the  orders  were 
seven  in  number.  It  decided,  further,  that  the  number  of  the  Sacra- 
ments was  seven,  that  the  bishops  were  superior  to  the  priests,  that 
the  priests  at  their  ordination  receive  the  Holy  Ghost  through  the 
mediation  of  the  bishops,  that  those  who  have  been  ordained  can  never 
become  laymen,  that  the  hierarchy  was  established  through  divine 
institution,  etc.  The  Council  declared  anathema  upon  all  who  taught 
otherwise. 

Luther  laid  emphasis  on  the  universal  priesthood  of  believers,  but 
not  to  such  an  extent  as  to  detract  from  the  office  of  the  ministry.  He 
declares  plainly  that  this  latter  office  is  an  institution  of  God  and  that 
men  are  called  to  this  office  through  the  mediation  of  the  Church. 
Luther  also  stated  that  whosoever  did  not  possess  the  regular  call  of 
the  Church  but  boasted  of  an  extraordinary  call,  which  he  cannot 
prove  by  signs  and  wonders,  shall  be  judged  as  a  hedge-preacher.  The 
congregation  or  the  Church  must  call  in  accordance  with  the  estab- 
lished order.  Calvix  took  the  position  that  not  only  was  the  office  of 
the  ministry  as  instituted  by  God  necessary,  but  also  the  presbytery. 
His  views  gave  rise  to  the  Presbyterian  and  aristocratic  form  of 
Church  government.  But  the  Scriptures  do  not  speak  of  lay  elders, 
but  only  of  ordained  presbyters.  The  Anahaptists  rejected  not  only 
the  office  of  the  ministry,  but  also  the  office  of  teaching  in  the  real 
sense,  and  together  with  other  fanatics  they  overemphasized  the  inner 
call  without  taking  the  external  call  into  consideration.  The  Pietists. 
such  as  Spexer,  laid  stress  on  the  universal  priesthood  of  believers, 
but  also  acknowledged  the  office  of  the  ministry,  stating  that  no  one 
ought  to  assume  this  office  without  being  called. 

The  Reformed  State  Church  of  England,  or  the  Anglican  Church, 
and  the  Episcopalian  Church  in  general,  is  characterized  by  its  high- 
church  tendencies,  and  indeed  in  some  quarters  by  its  Catholizing 
tendencies.  William:  Laud  was  one  of  the  most  noted  of  the  high- 
church  representatives  in  England  and  has  bsen  called  the  English 
Cyprian.  He  maintained  that  the  apostolic  succession  was  a  necessity 
and  that  it  constituted,  as  it  were,  the  channel  through  which  all  the 
divine  grace  was  communicated  to  men.  He  stated  that  only  an 
episcopal  church  which  possessed  the  apostolic  succession  could  rightly 
interpret  the  Word  of  God.  Episcopal  ordination  was  likewise  neces- 
sary to  make  valid  the  office  of  the  ministry.  This  high-church  tend- 
ency has  been  represented  in  modern  times  by  Puseyism.  —  There  are, 
however,  many  evidences  to  prove  that  ministers  have  served  in  the 
Episcopal  Church  who  have  not  received  episcopal  ordination.  Neither 
has  it  been   conclusively  proved  that  the  Episcopal   Church  possesses 


480  IXCI.KSIOI.OCY. 

an  unbroken  apostolic  succession  In  relation  to  the  office  of  the  min- 
istry or  the  episcopacy.  —  In  Germany  there  have  been  many  tenden- 
cies, but  the  teaching  of  the  symbols  concerning  the  ministry  have 
been  normative.  HiiKLiNc  states  that  the  Church  Is  the  subject  of  the 
ministry,  and  sets  forth  a  position  leaning  somewhat  toward  a  low- 
church  conception,  in  common  with  Thomaslus,  Harnack  and  others. 
LÖHK  represents  a  high-church  tendency  and  takes  the  position  that 
the  Church  is  the  object  of  the  ministry.  The  ministry  is  an  order 
which  Is  self-perpetuating.  Vii.mak  sets  forth  the  sacramental  char- 
acter of  ordination.  Ki.ikiotii  stresses  the  Institution  of  the  ministry 
by  God  before  the  establishment  of  the  Church.  The  congregation  of 
believers  Is  the  sacrificial  people  of  God  ordained  through  the  sacrifice 
of  devotion.  Their  whole  life  is  a  sacrifice  of  praise  and  thanksgiving. 
Out  of  the  ministerial  activity  of  the  congregation  proceeds  the  diaco- 
nate,  which  is  to  be  distinguished  from  the  ministry  and  is  the  second 
office  in  the  Church  of  Christ.  There  is  also  a  third  office  in  the 
Church,  which  is  distinguished  from  both  the  ministry  and  the 
diaconate,  viz.,  the  Church  Council.  Kliefoth  lays  special  stress  on 
the  ministry.  The  means  of  grace  and  the  ministry  are  given  to  the 
whole  Church,  but  only  the  incumbents  of  the  ministry  possess  the 
right  to  administer  the  means  of  grace.  He  especially  emphasizes  the 
fact  that  the  Sacraments  are  to  be  administered  through  the  estab- 
lished ministry.  Most  of  the  leading  theologians  of  the  State  Church 
of  Sweden  take  a  conservative  position  with  regard  to  the  office  of 
the  ministry.  U.  L.  Ullmax  sets  forth  the  significance  of  the  ecclesi- 
astical administration  of  the  means  of  grace.  He  proves  that  the 
individual  does  not,  either  of  his  own  accord  or  as  prompted  by  the 
suggestion  or  command  of  other  individuals,  possess  the  right  to  ad- 
minister the  means  of  grace.  The  Church  is  not  made  up  of  a  dis- 
orderly conglomeration  of  individuals,  but  is  rather  an  organism  with 
organized  community  life.  After  stating  that  the  ministry  through 
ordination  in  orderly  fashion  is  committed  by  the  Church  to  suitable 
persons,  Ullman  sets  forth  the  significance  of  ordination  and  states 
that  the  imposition'  of  hands  is  not  merely  a  symbolical  action,  but 
also  implies  the  communication  of  power.  The  Word  of  God  con- 
cerning the  office  of  the  ministry,  and  therefore  the  ministry  itself,  its 
promises  and  gracious  gifts,  are  really  bestowed  upon  the  candidate 
for  ordination  by  means  of  the  imposition  of  hands,  together  with  the 
accompanying  prayers  of  the  congregation.  Thus  the  candidate  be- 
comes the  recipient  of  gifts  necessary  in  the  discharge  of  his  ministry, 
provided  he  does  not  render  himself  unreceptive  to  these  gifts  through 
willful  obstinacy.  He  further  states  that  the  objective  significance  of 
ordination  is  to  be  sought  in  the  right  which  the  ordained  minister 
has  received  to  administer  the  means  of  grace.  The  subjective  sig- 
nificance  depends    upon    the   Word    of   God    and    prayer,    which   must 


THE   OFFICE   OF   THE    MINISTRY.  481 

produce  some  effect.  The  eft"ect  is,  however,  not  produced  ex  opere 
operato,  but  depends  upon  the  candidate's  subjective  state,  as  to 
whether  or  not  he  embraces  and  abides  by  the  promises  of  God  in 
connection  with  the  grace  bestowed  on  the  Gospel  ministry. 

In  the  Lutheran  Church  In  the  United  States  there  has  been  waged  a 
controversy  concerning  the  office  of  the  ministry  between  the  Missouri 
and  the  Iowa  Synods.  Watthek  and  the  Missouri  Synod  support  a  doc- 
trine which  is  congregationallstlc  in  the  extreme.  In  accordance  with 
this  view  the  ministry  is  conferred  upon  the  individual  members  as 
constituting  the  universal  priesthood  of  believers,  who  limit  the  exercise 
of  their  prerogatives  for  the  sake  of  order.  The  Missouri  Synod  holds 
that  the  local  congregation  of  believers  has  the  right  to  call  and  appoint 
ministers,  the  congregation  being  the  original  possessor  of  all  church 
power  by  the  Institution  of  God,  Ordination  Is  not  a  divine  ordinance, 
but  an  apostolic-ecclesiastical  institution.  The  loiva  Synod  denies  the 
correctness  of  this  position  and  declares  that  the  ministry  has  always 
been  the  possession  of  the  Church  taken  as  a  totality.  This  Synod 
holds  that  the  Church  possesses  the  office  in  and  with  the  means  of 
grace,  not  In  the  spiritual  priesthood  and  in  the  state  of  Its  true  mem- 
bers. The  Augustana  Synod,  which  has  been  acknowledged  by  the 
Archbishop  of  Uppsala,  bishops  and  the  leading  representatives  of  the 
Swedish  mother  Church  as  being  the  daughter  Church  in  the  United 
States,  takes  a  true,  Lutheran  and  confessional  position  In  relation  to 
this  doctrine.  While  the  form  of  Church  government  is  not  episcopal, 
by  reason  of  peculiar  circumstances  and  conditions  that  have  pre- 
vailed since  the  establishment  of  the  Synod,  still  the  office  of  the 
ministry  and  established  order  are  held  in  high  esteem.  The  Augus- 
+ana  Synod  may  be  said  to  be  neither  high-church  nor  low-church  In 
its  conception  of  the  ministry,  but  churchly.  The  Augustana  Synod 
in  Its  Constitution  says  that  the  Synod  shall  consist  of  all  pastors  and 
congregations  regularly  connected  with  the  same,  and  that  the  dele- 
gates to  the  synodical  conventions  shall  consist  of  an  equal  number 
of  pastors  and  laymen.  Hasselqi'ist  supported  the  conservative  view- 
•  point,  swerving  neither  to  the  right  nor  the  left,  but  highly  regarding 
the  office  of  the  ministry  given  by  God  for  the  service  of  the  Church. 

Krautii*  says:  "Many  embarrassing  circumstances  prevented  tho 
Lutheran  Church  from  developing  her  life  as  perfectly  In  her  church 
constitution  as  In  her  doctrine  and  worship.  The  idea  of  the  universal 
priesthood  of  all  believers  at  once  overthrew  the  doctrine  of  a  distinc- 
tion of  essence  between  clergy  and  laity.  The  ministry  is  not  an  order, 
but  it  is  a  divinely  appointed  office  to  which  men  must  be  rightly 
called.  No  imparity  exists  by  divine  right;  an  hierarchical  organiza- 
tion is  unchristian,  but  a  gradation  (bishops,  superintendents,  provosts) 
may  be  observed,  as  a  thing  of  human  right   only.      Government   by 

*  Krauth's  Conserv.  Ref.,  pp.  152,  153. 


482  KCCLESIOI.O(iY. 

consistories  lias  been  very  general.  In  Denmark,  Evangelical  bishops 
took  the  place  of  the  Roman  Catholic  prelates  who  were  deposed.  In 
Sweden  the  bishops  embraced  the  Reformation,  and  thus  secured  in 
that  country  an  'apostolic  succession'  in  the  high-church  sense;  though, 
on  the  principle  of  the  Lutheran  Church,  alike  where  she  has  as  where 
she  has  not  such  a  succession,  it  is  not  regarded  as  essential  even  to 
the  order  of  the  Church.  The  ultimate  source  of  power  is  in  the  con- 
gregations, that  is,  in  the  pastor  and  other  officers  and  the  people  of 
the  single  communions."  Krauth  represented  the  mediating  views  of 
the  Lutheran  Church.  He  was  neither  high-church  nor  low-church. 
He  guarded  the  rights  of  both  ministers  and  people.  He  did  not  place 
the  source  of  the  ministerial  office  in  the  local  congregation  or  limit 
its  authority  to  the  local  church.  He  traced  the  ministry  as  to  source 
to  the  universal  Church,  in  which  both  the  congregation  and  the  min- 
istry take  part  in  the  call.  Although  he  did  not  look  upon  ordination 
as  absolutely  necessary,  he  did  not  regard  ordination  as  only  a  con- 
firmation of  the  call  from  the  local  church,  but  as  the  final  act  in  a 
process  by  which  the  ministry  concurred  in  the  call.  He  also  held 
that  ordination  could  not  or  should  not  be  dispensed  with  and  that 
only  ordained  ministers  should  ordain  ministers.* 

*  A  Synopsis  of  Krauth's  Manuscript  lectures  on  art.  5  of  the  Augs- 
burg Confession  and  on  Ordination  may  be  read  in  "The  Doctrine  of 
the  Ministry"  by  Weidner,  pages  88 — 93  and  107 — 110  respectively. 


VII.     ESCHATOLOGY. 


ESCHATOLOGY  treats  of  the  doctrine  of  death,  the  inter- 
mediate state,  the  last  times,  the  return  of  Christ,  the  resur- 
rection, the  judgment,  the  consummation,  and  the  two  states 
of  eternity. 

Christianity  is  the  only  true  teleological  religion.  The 
heathen  religions  do  not  possess  any  real  eschatology  nor 
any  comprehensive  conception  of  the  progress  of  the  world 
toward  the  final  consummation  of  all  things.  Heathenism 
turns  a  retrospective  eye  upon  the  golden  age  of  the  past, 
but  the  future  is  wrapped  in  shadowy  mysticism  with  only 
a  vagrant  ray  of  hope  here  and  there  to  lighten  up  the  som- 
ber darkness.  Heathen  speculation  has  not  grasped  the 
meaning  of  God's  eternal  plan  and  purpose.  It  is  the  special 
divine  revelation  that  alone  sheds  a  flood  of  light  upon  the 
end  of  time  and  opens  up  the  gates  of  eternity  to  our  won- 
dering and  expectant  gaze,  so  that  in  some  measure  we  are 
enabled  to  understand  the  import  of  the  final  consummation. 
The  Christian  religion  is  not  only  the  religion  of  faith  and 
love,  it  is  also  the  religion  of  hope  and  life.  That  which  is 
central  and  characteristic  in  the  eschatology  of  the  Christian 
religion  is  the  second  advent  of  Christ.  The  culture  of  our 
present  day  civilization  dreams  of  a  Utopia  to  be  attained 
by  means  of  human  labor  and  invention,  education  and 
general  cultural  advancement.  But  Christianity  reveals  the 
necessity  of  divine  intervention.  Only  Christ  is  able  to 
produce  seasons  of  refreshing.  His  first  advent  became  the 
turning  point  in  time  toward  the  goal  of  salvation ;  His 
second  advent  shall  mark  the  end  of  the  days  of  man  and 
shall  usher  in  the  great  consummation  in  the  day  of  the  Son 
of  God.    Then  the  Church  will  have  completed  its  mission. 


484  ESCHATOLOGY. 

Ecclesiology  and  eschatology  stand,  therefore,  in  the  closest 
relation  to  each  other.  Eschatology  begins  with  the  doc- 
trine of  death,  inasmuch  as  the  Church  will  be  perfected 
through  death  and  the  final  transformation,  while  it  closes 
with  the  doctrine  of  the  resurrection,  the  new  creation  and 
life  everlasting. 

§40.    DEATH  AND  THE  INTERMEDIATE  STATE. 

Death  is  a  word  which  inspires  both  fear  and  joyous  ex- 
pectancy. To  the  unbeliever  death  stalks  about  as  the  king 
of  terror  and  fear,  while  to  the  believer  it  comes  softly  as 
a  messenger  from  the  heavenly  home.  Death  is,  neverthe- 
less, a  frightful  discord  which  would  never  have  occurred 
had  not  sin  entered  the  world.  Even  experienced  Chris- 
tians are  at  times  subject  to  feelings  of  dejection  in  con- 
templating the  journey  down  through  the  valley  of  the 
shadow  of  death.  Paul  gives  expression  to  an  emotion  of 
this  sort  in  2  Cor.  5 :  4,  when  he  speaks  of  his  desire  to  be 
clothed  upon,  in  order  that  what  is  mortal  might  be  swal- 
lowed up  of  life.  In  the  eighth  verse,  however,  he  gives 
expression  to  his  great  willingness  to  be  absent  from  the 
body  and  to  be  at  home  with  the  Lord.  The  Christians  re- 
joice because  the  hope  of  blessed  immortality  lightens  the 
pathway  that  leads  down  through  the  valley  of  death  and 
because  of  their  assurance  that  in  the  intermediate  state 
they  are  to  be  with  the  Lord.  Our  condition  in  the  inter- 
mediate state  will  depend  on  our  spiritual  state  in  this  life. 
The  intermediate  state  is  not  to  be  considered  as  a  school 
of  probation. 

1.    Death. 

Mors  corporalis,  or  death,  is  the  unnatural  separation  of 
the  bodiljj  and  spiritual  natures  of  man.  Through  death 
the  soul  is  deprived  of  its  material  substratum  and  organ 
and  yet  the  human  and  personal  characteristics  persist  in 
the  soul.  In  the  separation  the  soul  and  spirit  remain  in- 
separable, inasmuch  as  they  together  constitute  the  same 


DEATH  AXD  THE  INTERJIEDIATE  STATE.  485 

spiritual  nature,  viewed  only  from  different  aspects.  But 
inasmuch  as  the  body  is  the  organ  of  man's  spiritual  nature, 
and  inasmuch,  furthermore,  as  man  would  not  be  complete 
without  possessing  both  body  and  soul  or  spirit,  therefore 
we  may  not  consider  the  body  as  an  unessential  thing  or  as 
a  burden  to  the  spiritual  nature.  We  are  compelled  to 
reject  the  Deistic  theory,  which  considers  the  body  and  soul 
as  antagonistic  to  each  other,  the  body  being  the  prison  of 
the  soul,  from  which  the  soul  is  released  in  death.  We  also 
reject  the  Pantheistic  theory,  which  identifies  the  soul  with 
the  body,  the  death  of  the  latter  implying  likewise  the  death 
of  the  former.  The  expression,  to  kill  the  soul,  occurs  in- 
deed in  Scripture  (^vxy]v  åwoKTelvai ,  Mark  3:  4;  cf.  Job  36: 
14;  Numbers  23:  10),  but  the  death  of  the  soul  simply 
means  that  it  is  dead  in  relation  to  this  world.  The  soul  or 
the  spirit  per  se  cannot  die.  Compare  Matt.  10 :  28,  where 
it  is  stated  that  men  are  indeed  able  to  kill  the  body,  but 
they  are  not  able  to  kill  the  soul. 

In  death  the  soul  passes  out  from  the  body.  Compare 
Gen.  35:  18.  This  departure  does  not  always  take  place 
without  a  struggle,  even  though  the  faithful  often  yearn 
for  the  time  of  their  deliverance  and  entrance  into  the 
realms  of  glory.  Compare  1  Kings  17:  17  ff.,  also  Isa.  38: 
12  ff.  It  must  be  a  peculiar  feeling  to  be  "unclothed"  and 
enter  into  a  complete  spiritual  existence.  And  still  to  the 
Christian,  when  death  comes,  it  is  experienced  as  and 
likened  to  a  sweet  sleep ;  in  the  real  sense  he  shall  not  taste 
of  death.  Death  has  been  called  the  brother  of  sleep,  for 
which  reason  it  is  said  of  deceased  Christians  that  they 
sleep  in  Jesus. 

In  the  spiritual  sense,  however,  those  who  have  died  in 
Christ  do  not  sleep.  Death  becomes  an  epoch-making  ex- 
perience in  their  existence,  inasmuch  as  they  are  born  into 
a  new  world,  into  the  land  of  the  living.  While  for  the  time 
being  they  have  been  deprived  of  their  earthly  tabernacle, 
which  was  not  adapted  for  the  present  stage  of  their  ex- 
istence, still  at  the  same  time  they  have  been  liberated  from 
the  body  of  sin  and  death.     The  death  of  the  Christian  is 


486  i:s('iiAT()i.()(iY. 

not,  however,  to  be  thought  of  negatively  only,  it  must  also 
be  considered  from  the  positive  point  of  view^,  inasmuch  as 
the  end  of  the  Christian's  earthly  life  means  that  the  last 
fight  has  been  fought  and  a  glorious  victory  won. 

2.    Immortality. 

The  soul  is  immortal,  although  not  in  the  same  sense  as 
God  is  immortal.  The  immortality  of  the  soul  is  clearly 
taught  in  the  Holy  Scriptures.  The  following  passages  may 
be  observed:  "The  breath  of  life — a  living  soul"  (Gen.  2: 
7)  ;  "Let  your  heart  live  forever"  (Ps.  22:  26)  ;  "God  is  not 
the  God  of  the  dead,  but  of  the  living"  (Matt.  22:  32;  Mark 
12:  26,  27;  Luke  20:  36—38)  ;  "Have  eternal  life"  (John 
3:  15,  16)  ;  "Shall  live  forever"  (John  6:  58)  ;  "Though  he 
die,  yet  shall  he  live"  (John  11 :  25)  ;  "To  the  spirits  of  just 
men  made  perfect"  (Heb.  12:  23)  ;  "I  saw  the  souls  of  them 
that  had  been  slain  for  the  Word  of  God"  (Rev.  6:9).  We 
also  quote  the  remarkable  passage  by  Paul  in  Phil.  1 :  21 
— 23:  "For  to  me  to  live  is  Christ,  and  to  die  is  gain.  But 
if  to  live  in  the  flesh,  if  this  shall  bring  fruit  from  my  work, 
then  what  I  shall  choose  I  know  not.  But  I  am  in  a  strait 
betwixt  the  two,  having  the  desire  to  depart  and  be  with 
Christ;  for  it  is  very  far  better."  Between  eighteen  and 
nineteen  centuries  have  passed  since  Paul  penned  these 
words.  Only  the  Lord  knows  when  the  trumpet  of  resur- 
rection will  sound.  Is  it  likely  that  the  energetic  mind  of 
Paul  would  have  preferred  to  die,  if  death  had  meant  a  long 
period  of  unconsciousness  and  inactivity?  No,  No!  With 
the  spirits  made  perfect  and  living  in  Paradise  Paul  since 
he  died  has  been  as  active  as  he  was  in  the  body,  but  in  a 
different  way.  Death  as  a  sleep  refers  only  to  the  body  and 
the  activities  in  this  temporal  life.  The  passages  which 
speak  of  eternal  punishment"and  eternal  life  likewise  imply 
that  man  is  immortal.    Many  such  passages  could  be  cited. 

Among  other  proofs  the  following  may  be  mentioned : 
1)  The  metaphysical  proof,  which  is  based  on  the  imma- 
teriality of  the  soul;  2)  the  theological  proof,  which  sets 
forth  that  in  accordance  with  His  love,  faithfulness  and 


DEATH   AND  THE  IXTEUMEDIATE   STATE.  487 

other  attributes  God  does  not  desire  to  annihilate  man; 
3)  the  teleological  proof,  which  sets  forth  the  inadequacy 
of  this  earthly  life  fully  to  develop  and  exercise  the  capaci- 
ties of  man ;  4)  the  moral  proof,  which  sets  forth  that  there 
must  be  a  future  life  where  the  virtuous  receive  their  re- 
ward and  the  ungodly  are  punished;  5)  the  historical  proof 
or  the  universal  conviction  concerning,  and  faith  in,  the 
immortality  of  the  soul.* 

3.    The  Intermediate  State. 

The  intermediate  state  is  the  abode  and  condition  of  the 
dead  between  death  and  judgment.  The  Scriptures  make 
mention  of  two  abodes  in  the  intermediate  state,  the  one  of 
the  wicked,  the  other  of  the  blessed.  The  unbelievers  are 
in  Hades  and  the  believers  are  in  heaven  or  Paradise. 

1)  Hades:  a)  Hades  is  not  identical  with  the  grave  or 
kebher.  Sheol  or  Hades  is  not  used  in  the  same  sense  as 
kebher.  This  last  expression  is  used  to  designate  a  special 
place,  such  as  graves  in  Egypt  (Ex.  14:  11).  A  burial 
place  can  be  bought  and  sold  (Gen.  23:  4 — 20).  Dead 
bodies  are  buried  in  graves  by  the  living  (Gen.  50:  13). 
For  further  study  see  Sheol  in  Deut.  32 :  22 ;  also  Ezek.  32 : 
21.  Hades  and  the  grave  are  clearly  distinguished  from 
each  other.  Compare  Gen.  37 :  35 :  'T  will  go  down  to  Sheol 
to  my  son  mourning."  The  33d  verse,  however,  tells  us 
that  Jacob  had  the  impression  that  Joseph  had  been  de- 
voured and  not  buried.  —  Hades  was  used  in  contradistinc- 
tion to  heaven,  wherefore  the  reference  is  not  to  the  grave. 
Compare  Job  11:8.  Hades  is  used  synonymously  with  two 
other  expressions  which  do  not  have  reference  to  the  grave, 
viz.,  bor  and  eretz  tachtith.  With  regard  to  the  first  ex- 
pression, compare  Ps.  30 :  4,  and  with  regard  to  the  latter, 
compare  Ezek.  31 :  14,  16,  18.  Those  that  dwell  in  Hades 
are  in  a  conscious  state,  which  is  not  said  of  those  in  kebher. 
Read  Isa.  14 :  4 — 17,  the  tenth  verse  of  which  reads  as  fol- 
lows: "All  they  shall  answer  and  say  unto  thee.  Art  thou 

*  For  further  proofs,  compare  the  arguments  in  the  author's  Apolo- 
getics, pp.  177—182. 


488  ESCHATOLOGY. 

also  become  weak  as  we?  art  thou  become  like  unto  us?" 
The  New  Testament  does  not  make  use  of  <J^r)<:  in  the  sense 
of  the  grave.  Examine  Luke  16:  23  and  Acts  2:  27 — 31. 
Hades  is  used  eleven  times  in  the  New  Testament,*  if  1  Cor. 
15:55  is  counted,  and  in  none  of  these  passages  would  grave 
properly  answer  as  a  translation,  b)  In  the  New  Testament 
Hades  means  the  abode  of  the  unbelievers  during  the  inter- 
mediate state  and  is  therefore  not  identical  with  hell  after 
the  judgment.  There  are  many  who  hold  the  view  that  Sheol 
was  divided  into  two  parts,  one  for  the  unbelievers,  the 
other  for  the  blessed,  which  was  the  same  as  Abraham's 
bosom.  This  view  is  based  upon  the  fact  that  the  believers 
in  the  Old  Testament  speak  of  going  down  and  not  ascending 
to  heaven.  The  patriarch  Jpcob  said:  "I  will  go  down  to 
Sheol  to  my  son  mourning"  (Gen.  37:  35).  The  story  of 
Dives  and  Lazarus  is  also  used  as  a  proof.  It  is  stated  that 
the  rich  man  was  in  Hades.  Of  Lazarus  it  is  not  said  that 
he  was  in  Hades,  but  that  the  rich  man  saw  Abraham  afar 
off,  and  Lazarus  in  his  bosom.  It  is  stated  that  the  rich  man 
spoke  to  Abraham,  who  also  replied,  among  other  things 
that  there  was  a  great  gulf  fixed  between  the  abodes  of  the 
blessed  and  the  damned.  In  the  New  Testament  we  do  not 
read  that  the  faithful  at  death  descend  into  Hades.  It  may 
be  true  that  in  the  Old  Testament  Sheol  had  two  divisions 
but  it  is  evident  that  in  the  New  Testament  Hades  is  not 
the  abode  of  the  blessed  during  the  intermediate  state.'"" 
Therefore  Hades  is  the  abode  of  the  unbelievers  until  the 
day  of  judgment,  when  the  damned  shall  be  cast  into  yeenu 
or  the  real  hell  .  c)  Hell  is  called  Gehenna.  It  has  also  other 
names.    In  the  Old  Testament  hell  is  called  Abaddon,  which 

*''Ai8/;s  occurs  in  the  following  places:  Matt.  11:  23;  16:  18;  Luke 
10:  15;  16:  23;  Acts  2:  27,  31  (1  Cor.  15:  55);  Rev.  1:  18;  6:  8;  20: 
13,  14. 

**  Acts  2:  27,  31  has  been  cited  to  prove  that  Hades  also  included 
Paradise,  at  least  till  the  resurrection  and  ascension  of  Christ.  With- 
out expressing  a  decisive  opinion  in  this  matter,  still  it  is  certain  that 
after  the  ascension  Hades  has  reference  only  to  the  state  and  the  abode 
of  the  unbelievers  in  the  intermediate  state.  On  the  day  of  judgment 
Hades  will  be  cast  into  hell  or  the  burning  lake.  On  the  other  hand. 
Paradise  is  described  as  being  in  an  upward  direction  or  in  heaven. 
Compare  2  Cor.  12:   4. 


•    DEATII  AND  THE  INTERMEDIATE  STATE.  489 

is  translated  å-n-wXem  in  the  Greek.  In  the  New  Testament 
the  expression,  "the  lake  of  fire  and  brimstone,"  js  used. 
In  the  Old  Testament  the  terms  Abaddon  and  Hades  were 
used  to  distinguish  different  places,  wherefore  they  were 
not  identical.  Compare  Job  26:  6:  "Sheol  is  naked  before 
God,  and  Abaddon  hath  no  covering"  ;  also  compare  Proverbs 
15 :  11 ;  27  :  30.  In  Rev.  20 :  14  we  read  that  Hades  was  cast 
into  the  lake  of  fire,  for  which  reason  it  cannot  be  identical 
with  Gehenna,  d)  The  abode  of  the  evil  spirits  is  called 
a(Sv(T<70<; ,  the  abyss,  or  Tartaros.  With  reference  to  the  first 
expression,  read  Luke  8:  31:  "And  they  entreated  him  that 
he  would  not  command  them  to  depart  into  the  abyss." 
Compare  also  Rev.  9:  1,  2,  where  the  expression,  "the  pit  of 
the  abyss,"  is  used.  Read  2  Peter  2:4:  "For  if  God  spared 
not  angels  when  they  sinned,  but  cast  them  down  to  hell." 
Read  also  Rev.  20:  1.  On  the  day  of  judgment  the  evil 
spirits  will  be  cast  into  the  lake  of  fire  and  brimstone,  which 
is  the  same  as  Gehenna.  Compare  Rev.  20 :  10 ;  Matt.  5 : 
22 ;  18 :  9,  etc. 

2)  Paradise.  The  abode  of  the  blessed  during  the  inter- 
mediate state  is  called  Paradise.  Compare  Luke  23 :  43 ; 
2  Cor.  12 :  4 ;  Rev.  2 :  7.  The  first  of  these  passages  in  the 
light  of  the  others  proves  that  Paradise  is  not  in  Hades. 
Christ  has  ascended  into  heaven,  and  with  Him  are  the 
dead  who  have  died  in  the  Lord.  Compare  John  14 :  2,  3 ; 
Phil.  1 :  23 :  "Be  with  Christ."  Also  2  Cor.  5:8:  "At  home 
with  the  Lord." 

3)  The  Nature  of  the  Intermediate  State:  a)  The  souls 
of  the  believers  are  carried  by  angels  immediately  after 
their  separation  from  the  body  to  the  Paradise  of  God. 
This  journey  is  of  short  duration,  inasmuch  as  Jesus  said 
to  the  penitent  thief:  "To-day  shalt  thou  be  with  me  in 
Paradise."  The  unbelievers  enter  into  Hades.  The  Bible 
does  not  state  that  they  were  conveyed  thither  by  evil 
spirits.  Read  Luke  16:  22,  23  concerning  the  rich  man: 
"The  rich  man  also  died,  and  was  buried.  And  in  Hades 
he  lifted  up  his  eyes,  being  in  torments" ;  Acts  1 :  25,  where 
it  is  stated  concerning  Judas :  "That  he  might  go  to  his  own 


490  KSniATOT.OGY, 

place."  b)  The  soul  is  not  deprived  of  its  spiritual  faculties 
through. death;  rather  its  spiritual  and  true  nature  then 
comes  into  its  own.  The  intellect,  will,  emotions,  memory, 
etc.,  do  not  lose  their  activity,  but  become  more  intensively 
active,  broader  and  more  comprehensive  in  their  scope.  The 
spiritual  tendency  of  the  soul  also  remains  unchanged,  c) 
Corresponding  to  the  spiritual  relationship  of  the  soul,  its 
condition  in  the  intermediate  state  is  either  that  of  the 
blessed  awaiting  the  day  of  final  redemption,  or  that  of  the 
unbelievers  who  in  torment  await  with  terror  the  day  of 
final  judgment  and  damnation.  But  Paradise  and  Hades 
are  not  simply  states  of  soul,  they  are  also  places  of  abode, 
indicated  by  the  Greek  expression  tov,  "a  where,"  although 
their  geographical  location  is,  of  course,  unrevealed.  The 
location  of  Paradise,  with  the  testimony  of  Scripture,  is 
upward  in  the  third  heaven,  while  the  direction  of  Hades  is 
downward  in  the  nethermost  parts  of  the  earth.  Paradise 
and  the  third  heaven  are  very  probably  not  so  far  distant 
in  the  universe  as  many  might  feel  disposed  to  believe. 
When  we  consider  the  vast  astronomical  distances  between 
the  planets  and  the  rem'otest  stars,  it  is  very  probable  that 
heaven  is  not  to  be  found  beyond  the  stellar  universe,  but 
rather  within  the  bounds  of  creation  and  possibly  in  the 
very  center  of  the  universe.  Evidently  an  angel  is  not 
divinely  omnipresent,  but  requires  time  to  journey  from 
heaven  to  earth.  It  may  be  altogether  possible  for  an  angel 
to  move  more  swiftly  than  light,  and  still  time  is  required 
for  his  movements.  Compare  Daniel  9 :  21 — 23.  Gabriel 
left  heaven,  it  seems,  when  Daniel  began  to  pray,  but 
reached  Daniel  before  his  prayer  was  ended.  This  would 
seem  conclusive  evidence  that  heaven  is  not  without  the 
bounds  of  creation,  if  Gabriel  started  from  the  throne  of 
God.  The  angel  received  the  commandment  to  go  to  Daniel 
at  the  beginning  of  the  prayer.  In  coming  to  Daniel  the 
angel  covered  a  long  distance,  as  it  is  stated:  "Being  caused 
to  fly  swiftly."  Compare  Luke  23:  43;  2  Cor.  12:  2—4. 
d)  The  souls  do  not  sleep  in  the  intermediate  state,  for 
which  reason  we  reject  the  doctrine  of  Psychopannychism. 


DEATH   AND   THE   INTERMEDIATE   STATE.  491 

When  the  dead  are  said  to  sleep  the  reference  is  to  the  state 
of  the  body  in  death,  which  seems  to  be  as  one  asleep,  but 
this  does  not  imply  that  the  souls  sleep  spiritually.  The 
souls  of  the  dead  are  completely  conscious  and  awake  as  to 
their  spiritual  nature,  although  they  rest  from  their  earthly 
labors  and  enjoy  comfort.  We  read  in  Rev.  14:  13:  "That 
they  may  rest  from  their  labors."  This  passage  does  not, 
however,  imply  complete  idleness.  The  Lord  clearly  inti- 
mates that  both  the  unbelievers  and  the  believers  are  con- 
scious in  the  intermediate  state.  Compare  Luke  16 :  23 
— 31;  23:  43.  These  passages  also  prove  that  the  dead 
recognize  each  other.  The  occurrences  on  the  Mount  of 
Transfiguration  also  prove  that  the  intermediate  state  does 
not  imply  idleness  or  sleep.  It  is  not  probable  that  Paul,  if 
he  had  conceived  of  the  intermediate  state  as  implying  a 
condition  of  unconsciousness,  would  have  longed  for  it  and 
counted  it  as  a  great  gain.  He  states  clearly  that  death  is 
the  same  as  taking  our  departure  from  this  world  to  be  with 
Christ.  Compare  also  Isa.  14 :  4 — 17 ;  "He  is  not  the  God 
of  the  dead,  but  of  the  living:  for  all  live  unto  him"  (Luke 
20:  38)  ;  'To  the  spirits  of  just  men  made  perfect"  (Heb. 
12:  23)  ;  Rev.  6:  9 — 11.  This  last  passage,  especially,  re- 
veals the  inhabitants  of  heaven  as  being  perfectly  conscious 
sympathetic  and  filled  with  yearning  expectancy,  e)  Al- 
though in  relation  to  the  new  life  of  the  resurrection  the 
state  of  the  soul  in  the  world  of  the  spirit  may  be  said  to  be 
yu/Avov  eivat,  and  although  the  spirits  do  not  possess  material 
bodies  nor  any  investiture,  still  there  is  a  recognizable  ap- 
pearance corresponding  to  the  human  form  which  consti- 
tutes an  expression  of  the  individual  personality.  Compare 
Isa.  14:  9,  10;  Ezek.  31:  15—18;  Matt.  17 :  3 ;  Luke  9:  30. 
31;  Rev.  6:  11.  While  the  souls  do  not  possess  bodies,  still 
they  are  able  to  see,  speak,  hear,  feel,  etc.  Paul  took  for 
granted  that  a  disembodied  spirit  could  see  and  hear.  Com- 
pare.2  Cor.  12:  2 — 4.  It  is  the  soul  that  sees  by  means  of 
the  eye,  hears  by  means  of  the  ear,  etc.  The  soul  possesses 
faculties  which  it  cannot  use  here.  He  who  created  the  eye, 
the  ear,  etc.,  has  undoubtedly  endowed  the  soul  with  facul- 


492  ESCHATOI-OOY. 

ties  of  sight,  hearing,  speech,  etc.,  independent  of  a  material 
body,  f)  Inasmuch  as  the  souls,  therefore,  are  possessed 
of  consciousness  and  the  faculties  of  sight,  hearing,  feeling, 
memory,  etc.,  it  follows  that  knowledge  must  increase  and 
a  development  in  that  sense  take  place,  but  in  the  inter- 
mediate state  there  must  be  precluded  any  thought  of  con- 
tinued purification  or  any  progress  in  sanctification.  —  The 
doctrine  of  purgatory  is  not  to  be  found  in  the  Bible.  Both 
the  Greek  and  Roman  Catholic  Churches  teach  Purgatory, 
The  difl:'erence  is  only  in  the  kind  of  suffering.  The  Roman 
Church  speaks  of  a  purifying  fire,  but  the  Greek  Church 
only  mentions  tribulation.  According  to  the  teachings  of 
these  churches  Christ  by  His  atonement  did  not  bring  a  full 
pardon  for  all  sins,  but  He  prepared  the  way  for  salvation 
by  the  means  and  methods  stated  in  the  Bible  and  revealed 
through  the  Holy  Spirit.  Penitence  and  penance  are  neces- 
sary. If  the  penances  are  not  fully  done  in  this  life,  punish- 
ments follow  in  Purgatory  by  purifying  fires.  The  Council 
of  Trent  in  its  Catechism  teaches  thus :  "There  is  a  purga- 
torial fire,  where  the  souls  of  the  righteous  are  purified  by 
a  temporary  punishment,  that  entrance  may  be  given  them 
into  their  eternal  home,  where  nothing  that  is  defiled  can 
have  a  place."  Very  few  persons  escape  Purgatory,  because 
even  the  very  best  Christians  fail  in  their  penances  and 
neglect  the  full  requirements  of  satisfaction.  Those  in 
Purgatory  are  relieved  by  prayers  of  the  pious  fellow  Chris- 
tians on  earth  and  also  by  alms  and  masses.  —  The  Roman 
Catholics  support  their  views  by  the  following  Bible  pas- 
sages :  2  Mace.  2 :  43 — 46,  holding  it  to  be  inspired ;  Matt. 
5 :  25 ;  12  :  32 ;  1  Cor.  3 :  11—15 ;  15  :  29 ;  Rev.  21 :  27.  But 
it  is  very  evident  that  none  of  these  passages  prove  the 
existence  of  a  purgatory.  It  does  not  correspond  to  the  life 
in  Paradise.  The  souls  of  the  blessed  are  liberated  at  death 
from  all  imperfections  and  sins.  Hades  cannot  be*  a  purga- 
tory. The  Scriptures  make  mention  of  only  two  states  in 
the  world  of  the  spirit,  wherefore  it  is  impossible  to  assume 
a  third  state  or  abode.  Neither  is  there  to  be  found  in  the 
Scriptures  any  ground  for  the  doctrine  that  the  souls  of 


DEATH  AND  THE  INTERMEDIATE  STATE.  493 

men  may  be  converted  in  Hades  and  finally  transferred  to 
heaven  in  the  judgment.  If  there  were  freedom  of  choice 
in  the  intermediate  state  there  might  be  a  possibility  of  the 
blessed  falling  anew  into  sin.  The  souls  that  have  come  to 
Hades  will  remain  there  until,  on  the  day  of  judgment,  they 
will  be  removed  to  Gehenna,  while  the  souls  that  have  been 
borne  by  the  angels  to  Paradise  will  remain  there  in  their 
state  of  blessedness  until  the  resurrection,  when  they  will 
be  received  into  the  kingdom  prepared  for  them  from  the 
foundation  of  the  world.  The  proponents  of  the  doctrine  of 
probation  after  death  most  generally  make  use  of  specula- 
tive arguments.  However,  they  also  base  their  arguments 
on  Scripture.  They  refer  especially  to  1  Peter  3 :  19,  20  and 
4 :  6.  The  first  of  these  passages,  however,  does  not  neces- 
sarily imply  the  preaching  of  the  Gospel,  and  nothing  is 
said  of  a  continuation  of  the  preaching.  There  is  nothing 
in  the  Scriptures  to  support  the  position  that  Christ  con- 
tinues the  work  of  preaching  to  the  souls  in  Hades,  nor 
that  He  sends  either  angels  or  the  disembodied  souls  of  the 
blessed  to  perform  that  work.  The  latter  passage,  if  con- 
nected with  the  former,  cannot  be  said  to  prove  anything. 
Considered  alone  it  does  not  constitute  a  secure  foundation 
for  the  doctrine  of  probation  of  souls  in  Hades  and  their 
final  translation  to  the  Paradise  of  God.  The  evangelical 
preaching  spoken  of  in  1  Peter  4 :  6  may  mean  that  the 
dead  heard  the  Gospel  while  they  were  living,  inasmuch  as 
verse  5  states  that  the  dead  are  to  be  judged,  which  cannot 
mean  that  they  are  to  be  judged  as  dead,  but  judgment  is 
to  take  place  after  the  resurrection,  when  they  will  be  alive. 
If  the  fifth  verse  sets  forth  the  judgment  of  the  dead  after 
their  resurrection,  then  the  sixth  verse  may  logically  be 
considered  to  imply  the  preaching  of  the  Gospel  to  the  dead 
while  they  were  yet  alive  on  the  earth.  This  exegesis  may 
seem  forced,  and  yet  it  is  evident  that  the  doctrine  of  proba- 
tion after  death  must  require  more  secure  foundation  than 
this  uncertain  passage.  It  is  a  rule  of  Hermeneutics  that 
clear  passages  must  explain  uncertain  and  mysterious  pas- 
sages and  not  vice  versa.     In  the  light  of  the  analogy  of 


494  KSCHATOLOC.Y. 

faith  there  is  no  hope  of  conversion  after  death.  The  judg- 
ment will  depend  on  the  state  and  manner  in  which  men 
lived  in  this  life,  which  Paul  also  states  in  2  Cor.  5:  10: 
"For  we  must  all  be  made  manifest  before  the  judgment- 
seat  of  Christ;  that  each  one  may  receive  the  things  done 
in  the  body,  according  to  what  he  hath  done,  whether  it  be 
good  or  bad."  If  1  Peter  4:  6  refers  to  the  preaching  of 
the  Gospel  to  the  dead  in  the  world  of  the  spirit,  still  it  is 
not  certain  that  the  ungodly  in  Hades  are  meant.  Besides, 
neither  the  content  nor  the  object  of  this  preaching  is  made 
clearly  evident.  Compare  Christology,  §19,  II,  2,  1).  The 
views  of  the  old  Church  Fathers  are  preferable  to  the  mod- 
ern views  of  preaching  in  Hades.  Christ  in  relating  the 
experience  of  Dives  in  Hades  does  not  refer  to  any  revival 
preaching  in  Hades.  The  rich  man  had  no  hope.  If  he  had 
had  any  knowledge  of  preaching  the  Gospel  in  the  kingdom 
of  the  dead,  he  had  not  petitioned  Abraham  to  send  Lazarus 
to  his  five  brethren  in  his  father's  house  to  testify  unto 
them,  "lest  they  also  come  into  this  place  of  torment."  The 
request  of  the  rich  man  was  refused.  The  rich  man  knew 
that  once  in  Hades,  there  was  no  escape.  If  there  had  been 
a  chance  to  be  saved  in  Hades  and  transferred  to  Abraham's 
bosom,  the  rich  man  had  not  made  his  request.  And  Abra- 
ham did  not  relate  that  missionaries  were  sent  to  the  place 
of  torment.  On  the  contrary,  Abraham  said  that  there  was 
a  great  gulf  fixed  between  the  two  places,  hence  no  one 
could  pass  from  the  one  place  to  the  other. 

Some  people  insist  that  there  must  be  some  chance  for 
neglected  human  beings,  even  in  Christian  lands,  who  die 
like  heathen.  We  only  know  what  Paul  says  in  regard  to 
those  without  excuse,  but  he  does  not  draw  the  conclusion 
in  relation  to  possible  cases  of  excuse.  Nor  does  he  discuss 
directly  the  condition  of  children  who  die  unbaptized  or  as 
heathen.  We  know  that  except  a  man  be  born  anew,  he 
cannot  see  the  kingdom  of  God.  God  is  not  bound  abso- 
lutely by  the  means.  Christians,  therefore,  have  the  hope 
that  the  Holy  Spirit  has  made  provision  for  such  children, 
as  new  birth  is  necessary  and  Christ  died  for  them. 


nEATII   AXn   THE  INTERArEDTATR   STATE.  495 

With  regard  to  the  heathen  who  have  never  heard  the 
Gospel  it  may  be  stated  that  the  Word  of  God  reveals  nothing 
as  to  whether  or  not  an  opportunity  will  be  given  them  after 
death  to  embrace  the  Gospel.  All  speculation  along  this 
line  is  fruitless.  The  Word  of  God  clearly  states  that  this 
present  life  is  the  time  of  probation.  "Behold,  now  is  the 
acceptable  time;  behold,  now  is  the  day  of  salvation"  (2 
Cor.  6:2);  "It  is  appointed  unto  men  once  to  die,  and  after 
this  cometh  the  judgment"  (Heb.  9:  27).  With  regard  to 
those  that  have  not  had  the  privilege  of  a  special  revelation, 
read  Rom.  1 :  18 — 20 ;  2 :  12.  Inasmuch,  therefore,  as  God 
has  not  revealed  anything  directly  with  regard  to  the  hea- 
then, we  ought  not  to  speculate  about  it,  but  entrust  that 
matter  to  the  Lord  Himself,  while  we  prayerfully  labor  for 
the  propagation  of  the  Gospel  among  all  the  nations  in  the 
world.  It  is  clear  that  the  heathen,  whether  in  Christian 
countries  or  elsewhere,  cannot  be  saved  by  good  works, 
human  wisdom  and  self-atonement.  There  may  be  people 
outside  the  pale  of  Christianity  who  confess  their  sins  and 
desire  forgiveness,  but  do  not  know  the  way.  But  however 
God  solves  the  problem,  there  is  no  foundation  for  the  doc- 
trine of  probation  in  Hades.  We  are  bound  by  God's  revela- 
tion, must  use  the  means  of  grace  and  do  all  we  can  to  pro- 
mote missionary  activities.  Compare  Matt.  28:  19;  Rom. 
10:  11—14;  2:  9—16.  g)  The  relation  of  the  dead  to  this 
world.  They  remember  their  former  life  and  think  of  their 
dear  ones.  Love  is  stronger  than  death.  Naturally  the 
blessed  in  the  Lord  are  vitally  interested  in  the  struggles 
and  the  triumphs  of  the  Church,  while  they  long  for  the 
time  of  the  end  and  the  consummation.  Through  the  angels 
they  learn  of  much  and  rejoice  over  the  salvation  of  souls. 
Study  Luke  15:  7;  Rev.  6:  9—11.  See  also  Luke  9:  30  and 
31,  where  we  are  told  that  Moses  appeared  with  Jesus  in 
glory  and  conversed  about  the  latter's  death.  It  is  diffi- 
cult to  determine  whether  or  not  Heb.  12 :  1  refers  to  this 
question.  The  twenty-second  and  the  twenty-third  verses 
of  the  same  chapter,  however,  contain  certain  evidences  of 
the  close  spiritual  relationship  of  the  Church  Triumphant 


496  KSCITATOLOGY, 

with  the  Church  MiHtant.  Jesus  Christ  is  the  common  head 
of  both  the  Church  Triumphant  and  the  Church  Militant 
and  is  present  in  both.  However,  this  close  spiritual  rela- 
tionship does  not  imply  that  the  dead  visit  the  earth.  There 
need  be  no  doubt  that  it  would  be  possible  for  them  to  do 
so  with  divine  permission,  but  it  is  not  probable  that 
the  dead  depart  from  their  abodes.  The  instances  of  Moses 
and  Samuel  as  well  as  those  who  arose  at  the  resurrection 
of  Christ  might  be  cited  in  support  of  the  possibility  of 
such  returns  of  the  dead  to  this  world,  but  this  does  not 
prove  that  such  visits  are  common.  Luke  16:  17 — 31  would 
seem  to  prove  that  the  ungodly  are  unable  to  reveal  them- 
selves upon  the  earth.  This  question  takes  on  peculiar  sig- 
nificance polemically  in  relation  to  the  tenets  of  Spirit- 
ualism. It  is  the  Lord  alone  who  possesses  the  keys  to  the 
realms  of  death  and  Hades, 

4.  Notes  on  the  History  of  Dogma. 
Most  of  the  early  Church  Fathers  taught  that  the  soul  is 
immortal  by  nature.  Generally  speaking,  they  accepted  the 
doctrine  of  the  intermediate  state.  There  were  many  who 
believed  that  before  the  death  of  Christ  the  souls  of  all  the 
dead  entered  into  Hades,  although  to  different  parts  of  it. 
but  that  Christ  at  the  time  of  His  descent  into  Hades  liber- 
ated the  believers  of  the  Old  Covenant  and  brought  them 
with  Him  to  heaven.  During  the  Polemical  period  it  was 
generally  believed  and  taught  that  after  the  death  of  Christ 
the  believers  immediately  after  death  enter  into  Paradise. 
The  doctrine  of  probation  after  death  was  generally  re- 
jected. At  the  close  of  the  Polemical  period,  through  the 
influence  of  Augustine  and  Gregory,  the  doctrine  of  purga- 
tory made  its  appearance  in  definite  form,  which  was  fur- 
ther developed  during  the  Middle  Ages  and  came  to  include 
the  doctrine  of  deliverance  from  purgatory.  It  was  taught 
that  there  were  five  abodes  for  the  souls  of  the  dead,  viz.. 
hell  in  the  real  sense,  heaven,  limbus  infantum,  limbus 
patrum  for  the  faithful  in  the  Old  Testament,  and  purga- 
tory.    The  unbaptized  children  in  limbus  infantum  do  not 


DEATH   AND  THE  INTEUMEDIATE  STATE.  497 

suffer  the  pains  of  hell,  but  they  experience  the  loss  of  the 
heavenly  bliss.  The  Protestants  rejected  the  doctrine  of 
purgatory.  They  also  rejected  the  doctrine  of  psychopan- 
nychism,  or  of  sleep  during  the  intermediate  state,  which 
was  advocated  by  the  Anabaptists.  Calvin  wrote  a  refuta- 
tion of  the  psychopannychism  of  the  Anabaptists.  Luther 
expressed  himself  at  times  somewhat  in  favor  of  a  sleep  of 
the  soul,  although  he  did  not  teach  that  the  soul  was  un- 
conscious in  the  intermediate  state,  but  that  the  souls  of 
the  blessed  rested  in  God  and  were  filled  with  ecstatic  joy 
and  expectancy.  The  early  Dogmaticians  rejected  the  doc- 
trine of  the  sleep  of  the  soul.  They  all  set  forth  clearly  the 
immortality  of  the  soul.  Generally  speaking,  the  immor- 
tality of  the  soul  is  accepted  by  the  Socinians,  the  Ration- 
alists and  philosophers,  while,  of  course,  the  Materialists 
reject  this  doctrine  in  common  with  all  consistent  Pan- 
theists. The  Supranaturalists  generally  advocate  the  doc- 
trine of  probation  after  death.  Some  also  held  the  doc- 
trine of  an  intermediate  corporeity  in  the  spirit  world. 
The  orthodox  Lutheran  theologians  teach  that  the  eternal 
state  of  man  is  determined  on  this  side  of  the  grave,  al- 
though there  are  some  who  entertain  the  hope  that  earnest 
seekers  after  salvation  among  the  heathen,  who  have  not 
had  the  privilege  of  hearing  the  Gospel,  may  after  death 
be  afforded  an  opportunity  of  learning  to  know  the  Saviour 
of  the  world.  Conservative  theologians,  however,  do  not 
care  to  express  themselves  dogmatically  on  a  subject  con- 
cerning which  the  Scriptures  contain  no  direct  revelation. 

JusTix  Martyu  set  forth  that  the  helievers  are  not  subject  to  death 
by  reason  of  their  participation  in  the  absolute  life.  The  duration  of 
the  period  of  the  punishment  of  the  ungodly  depends  on  the  will  of 
God.  Iken.eus  says  that  the  soul  is  immortal  by  reason  of  Its  sim- 
plicity and  Indivisibility,  and  that  the  souls  of  the  blessed  are  in 
Paradise  in  disembodied  state,  but  with  human  form,  awaiting  the 
resurrection.  Tatiax  declares  that  the  soul  dies  with  the  body,  pro- 
vided it  knows  not  the  truth,  but  that  it  also  is  resurrected  with  the 
body  at  the  judgment  and  that  it  is  punished  with  immortality.  The 
souls  of  believers  remain  alive  throughout  the  intermediate  state. 
TERTtrLLiAN  teaches  the  immortality  of  the  soul  and  rejects  the  doctrine 
of   psychopannychism.      The    prayers    of   the    living   contribute   to    the 

I>i)r/i:iatiis.      17. 


498  KsniATOLor.Y. 

comfort  of  the  dead.  Ci.k.mknt  ok  Alkxaxukia  speaks  of  a  purification 
tliat  takes  place  in  the  intermediate  state  by  means  of  a  purifying  fire 
which  permeates  the  soul.  Okuikn  bases  the  immortality  of  the  soul 
on  its  knowledge  of  God.  After  death  the  soul  receives  a  sublime  body 
which  in  form  is  like  the  earthly  ])ody.  The  pure  souls  are  carried 
upward,  but  the  unclean  souls  hover  about  the  grave.  Before  the 
descent  of  Christ  in  Hades  all  the  believers  were  brought  to  Abraham's 
bosom,  but  afterwards  they  have  entered  directly  into  the  Paradise 
of  heaven.  .•  •  ^ 

GuKcoKY  OK  Nazianzus  supportcd  the  doctrine  of  the  supplication  of 
the  saints.  In  the  form  of  prayer  he  speaks  to  the  dead,  as  to  his 
sister  and  to  Basil.  He  speaks  of  a  purifying  fire  in  connection  with  the 
judgment  of  the  world.  Gkeoohy  of  Nyzza  says  that  the  invisibility 
and  supersensuous  nature  of  the  soul  are  proofs  of  its  immortality. 
He  believed  in  the  supplication  of  the  saints  and  also  that  the  dead  can 
intercede  for  the  living.  He  himself  at  one  time  prayed  to  Theodorus 
for  his  assistance.  Chry.sostom  also  supported  the  doctrine  of  the 
supplication  of  the  saints  and  believed  that  their  intercessions  were 
efficacious.  AuGirsTiNE  was  the  first  to  place  the  process  of  purification 
in  the  intermediate  state.  He  denied  that  the  souls  have  bodies  in 
the  intermediate  state.  Gkpxjoky  the  Gkeat  supported  the  doctrine  of 
Ignis  purgatorius  in  the  intermediate  state  for  minor  sins  and  that 
the  sacrifice  of  the  mass  can  liberate  souls  from  purgatory. 

Thomas  Aquinas  taught  that  the  soul  is  immortal,  and  sought  to 
prove  it  by  the  innate  thought  and  desire  for  immortality  in  the 
intellect.  However,  he  distinguished  between  anlma  sensitiva  and 
intellectiva,  declaring  that  anima  intellectiva  was  immortal.  He  taught 
with  regard  to  purgatory  that  neither  the  ungodly  nor  the  very  pious 
saints  enter  into  this  state.  The  doctrine  concerning  the  efficacy  of 
the  mass  in  behalf  of  the  souls  in  purgatory  was  confirmed  at  the 
Council  of  Lyons  in  1279  and  at  the  Council  of  Florence  in  1439.  At 
the  latter  Council  it  was  determined  that  if  the  penitent  died  before 
satisfactions  had  been  completed  he  would  be  purified  from  the  con- 
tagion of  sin  through  the  pains  of  purgatory.  But  these  pains  are 
reduced  and  liberation  secured  by  means  of  the  intercessory  prayers, 
masses,  alms  and  other  good  deeds  of  the  faithful.  The  Council  of 
Trent  confirmed  the  same  doctrine.  Bei,lak:mix  declares  that  the  pains 
of  purgatory  are  more  severe  than  any  earthly  suffering. 

LuTHEK  rejected  the  doctrine  of  purgatory,  but  does  not  dwell  at  any 
length  on  the  intermediate  state.  He  also  rejected  the  doctrine  of  a 
moral  development  during  the  intermediate  state.  With  regard  to 
such  as  had  never  heard  the  Gospel  here  on  earth  Luther  states  that 
the  Lord  is  able  to  grant  them  faith  after  death,  but  that  it  cannot  be 
proved  that  He  does  so.  The  early  Dogmaticians,  of  course,  rejected 
the  doctrine  of  purgatory  together  with  the  Catholic  views  with  regard 


DEATH  AND  THE  IXTEBilEDIATE  STATE.  499 

to  the  distinctive  places  of  abode  of  the  souls  of  the  dead  and  accepted 
only  two  places,  coelum  et  infernum.  Calixtus  said  that  the  inter- 
mediate state  implied  neither  blessedness  nor  the  opposite.  The 
Socinians  declared  that  the  immortality  of  the  soul  was  a  gift  of  the 
Lord,  since  by  nature  souls  are  mortal.  Faustus  Socinus  said  that 
the  soul  dies  with  the  body  and  that  both  are  raised  up  on  the  last  day. 
Leibnitz  and  Wolff  supported  the  doctrine  of  the  immortality  of 
the  soul.  Kant  likewise  supported  the  theory  of  immortality,  stating 
that  the  harmony  of  moral  requirement  and  happiness  cannot  be 
attained  in  this  life,  wherefore  in  accordance  with  the  category  of  the 
practical  reason  there  must  be  a  life  after  this.  Swedenhokg  said  that 
man  possesses  a  finer  bodily  organism  beneath  the  external  material 
body  and  that  the  finer  body  persists  after  the  death  of  the  latter.  The 
conditions  after  death  are  connected  with  and  resemble  the  conditions 
in  this  present  life.  At  death  man  enters  the  world  of  the  spirit, 
where  in  accordance  with  his  state  of  soul  he  is  prepared  either  for 
heaven  or  hell.  There  is  no  opportunity  afforded  in  the  intermediate 
state  for  conversion.  Only  the  discords  in  man's  nature  are  there 
harmonized.  Hell  does  not  imply  perpetual  punishment.  The  wretched 
have  periods  of  refreshing.  However,  every  transgression  is  followed 
by  terrible  sufferings.  Heaven  is  a  blessed  state  in  which  every  one 
finds  suitable  employment.  The  blessed  are  made  more  and  more 
perfect.  Reinhakd  maintained  that  the  soul  by  reason  of  the  great 
violence  of  death  sinks  into  a  state  of  unconsciousness  for  a  protracted 
period.  ScHLEiER:\rACHER  rejected  the  retributory  as  well  as  the  intel- 
lectual proofs  of  the  immortality  of  the  soul  and  stated  that  the  best 
proof  was  faith  in  the  unchangeableness  of  the  divine  union  with  the 
manhood  of  Christ,  for  when  Christ  declares  Himself  immortal,  it  has 
reference  to  us  likewise.  The  Christian  soul  is  not  after  death  all  at 
once  liberated  from  sin,  but  only  gradually  through  continued  develop- 
ment. Strauss  said  that  on  the  other  side  of  the  grave  is  to  be  found 
the  last  enemy  for  speculative  criticism  to  overcome.  Martense.n 
supported  a  theory  of  corporeity  and  purgation  in  the  intermediate 
state.  Thomasius  rejected  these  theories  and  declared  that  the  union 
with  Christ  supplied  the  temporary  loss  of  a  bodily  organ.  Kahnis 
held  that  purification  and  development  take  place  in  the  intermediate 
state.  Björling  entertained  the  hope  that  the  heathens  who  had 
obeyed  the  natural  revelation  and  become  conscious  of  the  need  of  the 
forgiveness  of  sin  and  reconciliation  would  be  afforded  an  opportunity 
to  learn  of  Christ  after  death.  But  those  heathens  who  had  hardened 
their  hearts  against  the  voice  of  conscience  would  have  no  desire  to 
be  instructed  and  therefore  be  unable  to  receive  any  knowledge  of 
Christ.  Some  theologians  hold  the  view  that  heathens,  who  die  re- 
penting and  asking  God  or  the  gods  to  save  them,  will  receive  instruc- 
tion in  regard  to  salvation  by  Christ  immediately  after  death,  but  not 


500  ESCHATOLOGY. 

in  Hades,  because  once  in  Hades,  there  is  no  hope.  Gkaxkki.t  supported 
the  doctrine  of  the  inward  purification  of  the  soul  in  the  intermediate 
state.  He  also  maintained  that  conversion  could  take  place  in  Hades. 
In  Hades  salvation  is  preached  to  such  as  have  not  heard  the  Gospel 
on  the  earth.  Among  such  he  not  only  counts  the  heathens  but  also 
such  persons  in  Christendom  who  have  been  reared  as  heathens  or 
who  have  not  had  favorable  opportunities  for  repentance.  Fkank 
states  that  there  is  no  message  of  salvation  implied  in  the  preaching 
in  Hades  spoken  of  in  1  Peter  4:  6.  He  does  not  base  any  hope  for 
the  salvation  of  the  heathens  on  Rom.  2:  14 — 16  and  27.  He  does  not 
deny  that  such  Scripture  passages  as  John  3:  16;  10:  16;  11:  52;  Acts 
10:  35;  Rom.  2:  16;  1  Tim.  2:  4;  2  Peter  3:  9;  1  John  2:  2  contain 
intimations  of  the  divine  plans  of  salvation  in  relation  to  this  matter, 
but  in  common  with  other  conservative  theologians  he  does  not  believe 
that  they  contain  sufficiently  clear  statements  on  which  to  base  a 
dogmatic  assertion.  He  entertains  the  hope  that  God  will  not  reject 
any  man  simply  of  his  natural  state  and  is  willing  to  abide  the  fulfill- 
ment of  Isa.  25:  7.  This  hope  he  bases  on  the  fact  that  it  is  unbelief 
that  condemns  a  man.  Of  course,  he  acknowledges  that  original  sin, 
per  se,  is  damnatory.  But  he  has  no  desire  to  speak  dogmatically 
about  such  heathens  as  have  not  had  the  opportunity  on  earth  of 
accepting  the  grace  of  salvation  through  faith. 

§41.     THE  LAST  TIMES. 

In  like  manner  as  the  earthly  life  of  the  individual  ter- 
minates in  a  last  day,  preceded  by  a  period  marked  with  its 
special  characteristics,  so  the  end  of  the  present  world  aeon 
will  precede  the  critical  beginning  of  the  new  and  eternal 
aeon  in  which  the  estate  of  man  will  depend  on  the  relation- 
ships sustained  during  the  period  of  grace.  In  a  certain 
sense  the  whole  of  the  New  Testament  period  constitutes 
the  last  times,  but,  strictly  speaking,  the  last  times  are  the 
period  which  immediately  precedes  the  second  advent  of 
Christ.  The  last  day  may  be  considered  the  very  last  day 
of  the  present  aeon  or  the  final  day  of  judgment,  but  it  may 
also  be  considered  as  a  period  of  judgment.  Compare  2 
Peter  3 :  8 ;  2  Tim.  3:1;  Rev.  1 :  10 ;  10 :  6,  7.  The  last 
times  have  their  special  characteristics,  which,  at  least  by 
the  children  of  God,  may  be  studied  and  interpreted,  and 
while  the  day  of  the  Lord  will  come  unexpectedly  to  many, 
it  will  not  come  as  a  thief  in  the  night  to  Christians  who 


THE   LAST   TIMES.  501 

watch  and  pray.  Compare  Dan.  12 :  4 ;  Matt.  24 :  33 ;  1 
Thess.  5 :  1 — 5.  While,  on  the  one  hand,  during  the  last 
times  Christianity  will  be  spread  over  the  whole  earth 
more  generally  than  ever,  still  the  forces  of  Antichrist  will 
likewise  develop  and  culminate  during  that  period  in  their 
final  manifestation  of  temporal  power.  This  will  constitute 
one  of  the  most  clearly  apparent  signs  of  the  approaching 
end  of  the  present  aeon,  but  there  will  also  be  other  signs 
to  show  how  far  advanced  are  the  hands  on  the  great  clock 
of  time. 

1.    The  General  Spread  of  Christianity. 

In  one  of  the  last  utterances  of  our  Lord  He  commanded 
the  disciples  to  go  into  all  the  world  and  make  disciples  of 
all  nations.  In  one  of  His  eschatological  addresses  Jesus 
says :  "And  this  gospel  shall  be  preached  in  the  whole  world 
for  a  testimony  unto  all  the  nations ;  and  then  shall  the  end 
come"  (Matt.  24:  14).  In  Mark  13:  10  we  read:  "The 
gospel  must  first  be  preached  unto  all  the  nations."  It  is 
evident  that  these  passages  do  not  imply  that  all  men  are 
to  be  converted.  The  Church  of  Christ  is  an  ecclesia  and 
shall  so  remain.  The  great  question  involved  is  as  to 
whether  or  not  all  nations  shall  nominally  accept  Chris- 
tianity before  the  return  of  the  Lord.  The  passages  cited 
do  not  necessarily  imply  such  a  conclusion.  The  Gospel  of 
the  kingdom  will  be  preached  in  all  the  world  for  a  testi- 
mony unto  them,  but  the  prophecies  contained  in  these  pas- 
sages do  not  state  that  the  whole  world  and  all  the  nations 
shall  belong  to  the  Christian  Church  before  Christ's  second 
coming.  Paul,  the  Apostle  to  the  heathen  nations,  did  not 
entertain  the  view  concerning  the  evangelization  of  the 
whole  world  which  is  now  very  generally  implied  in  the  ex- 
pression that  the  Gospel  is  to  be  preached  among  all  nations. 
Compare  Col.  1 :  23,  where  he  states  that  even  in  his  time 
the  Gospel  had  already  been  preached  in  the  whole  creation 
under  the  heavens.  These  words  of  Paul  are  peculiarly 
illuminating  in  relation  to  the  solution  of  this  problem.  The 
fact  that  the  Gospel  is  to  be  preached  as  a  testimony  is  to 


502  KsciiAroi.ociY. 

be  emphasized.  This  does  not  mean  that  all  nations  are 
to  embrace  Christianity.  We  know  even  now  that  where 
the  sun  of  Christianity  formerly  shone  in  all  its  midday 
brilliance,  the  crescent  now  sheds  its  dubious  light.  The 
work  of  missions  has  made  wonderful  progress  and  the 
teachings  of  Christianity  are  disseminated  among  all  peo- 
ples. But  in  comparing  Rev.  9 :  20  we  find  that  as  far  down 
in  time  as  the  sixth  trumpet  there  will  be  idolatry  upon  the 
earth.  With  regard  to  the  conditions  which  will  obtain  at 
the  time  of  Christ's  second  coming,  note  the  following: 
"When  the  Son  of  man  cometh,  shall  he  find  faith  on  earth?" 
(Luke  18:  8).  By  this  we  do  not  mean  to  deny  that  mis- 
sionary endeavors  have  been  crowned  with  great  success, 
but  simply  state  that  at  the  time  of  our  Lord's  advent  all 
nations  will  not  have  accepted  Christ.  Our  missionary  duty 
remains  quite  as  compelling  in  the  face  of  these  facts,  inas- 
much as  it  is  incumbent  on  us  to  obey  the  commands  of  our 
Lord  to  labor  for  the  ingathering  of  all  the  nations  into 
the  fold  of  the  Church.  The  Scriptures  speak  of  the  times 
of  the  Gentiles-^  and  of  the  fullness  of  the  Gentiles,  expres- 
sions which  imply  that  all  nations  have  their  periods  of 
divine  visitation  and  that  our  Lord  shall  from  all  the  peoples 
of  the  earth  gather  those  that  He  foresees  shall  believe  and 
therefore  belong  to  the  true  ecclesia.  In  relation  to  the 
Jews,  all  nations  are  called  Gentiles.  Even  during  the  time 
of  the  Gentiles  many  Jews  will  be  saved,  but  in  accordance 
with  the  prophecies  of  the  Scriptures  the  Jews  will  in  the 


*  The  Times  of  the  Gentiles  are  counted  as  covering  the  times  of 
Israelitish  and  especially  Jewish  oppression  by  the  world  powers.  The 
Babylonian  captivity  marks  the  real  beginning  and  the  Roman  cap- 
tivity intensifies  the  oppression,  because  with  the  destruction  of  Jeru- 
salem, A.  D.  70,  the  dispersion  of  the  Jews  among  all  nations  became 
a  fact  and  was  realized  more  and  more.  The  Times  of  the  Gentiles 
began  with  Nebuchadnezzar  and  the  Babylonian  empire  and  have  con- 
tinued through  the  Medo-Persian,  the  Greek-Macedonian  and  the  Ro- 
man empires.  The  last  revelation  of  the  Roman  power  will  be  during 
the  full  manifestation  of  the  ten  kingdoms,  the  little  horn  or  rather 
the  two  beasts.  Compare  Dan.  7,  8,  11  and  Rev.  1.3.  A  great  sign  of 
the  approach  of  the  end  of  the  Times  of  the  Gentiles  is  the  downfall 
of  the  Turkish  power.  The  occupancy  of  Palestine  by  a  Christian 
power  as  a  result  of  the  World  War  was  a  remarkable  fulfillment  of 
prophecy. 


THE  LAST  TIMES,  503 

last  times  more  generally  than  ever  before  embrace  Chris- 
tianity. In  Romans  11:  25  we  read  these  especially  im- 
portant words:  "For  I  would  not,  brethren,  have  you  ig- 
norant of  this  mystery,  lest  ye  be  wise  in  your  conceits, 
that  a  hardening  in  part  hath  befallen  Israel,  until  the  full- 
ness of  the  Gentiles  be  come  in ;  and  so  all  Israel  shall  be 
saved."  These  last  words  do  not  mean  that  all  Jews  will 
be  saved,  and  very  probably  they  do  not  mean  that  they  will 
even  nominally  become  Christian,  but  they  do  mean  that  the 
Jewish  nation  will  finally  assume  an  attitude  toward  Christ 
and  His  Church  different  from  that  which  now^  obtains.  With 
regard  to  the  receiving  of  the  Jews,  Paul  writes  in  Romans 
11:  15  as  follows:  "For  if  the  casting  away  of  them  is  the 
reconciling  of  the  world,  what  shall  the  receiving  of  them 
be,  but  life  from  the  dead?"  But  this  expression  does  not 
constitute  a  conclusive  proof  that  the  Jewish  nation  as  such 
will  become  a  Christian  nation  before  the  second  advent  of 
the  Lord.  There  are  many  passages  in  Scripture  which 
seem  literally  to  mean  that  the  Jewish  people  will  finally 
return  to  their  own  country  and  possess  it.  There  are  very 
distinct  evidences  of  this  return  in  our  day.  All  the  Jews 
did  not  return  to  Palestine  after  the  Babylonian  captivity. 
The  conditions  will  be  the  same  at  the  end  of  the  so-called 
Roman  captivity.  More  Jews  have  returned  to  Palestine 
during  the  nineteenth  and  twentieth  centuries  than  returned 
to  the  Holy  Land  after  the  Babylonian  captivity.  For  fur- 
ther reference  concerning  the  return  of  Israel,  read  Deut. 
30 :  3,  4 ;  Isa.  11 :  11,  12 ;  Ezek.  36 :  4—38 ;  39 :  23—28 ;  Dan. 
12:  7;  Zech.  12:  10—14;  Acts  15:  15—17. 

2.  Antichristianity. 
Christianity  had  hardly  gained  a  foothold  in  the  Roman 
Empire  before  violent  opposition  was  encountered.  The 
Church  was  made  the  object  of  such  frightful  persecutions 
and  had  experienced  such  a  fearful  tribulation  that  many 
believed  that  Antichrist  had  already  come.  Many  have 
maintained  that  Nero  was  the  Antichrist.  By  reason  of  the 
visions  of  Daniel  concerning  the  little  horn  and  the  vision 


r)04  ESCIIATOI.OflY. 

of  John  concerning  the  beast  there  was  good  ground  for  the 
assumption  that  the  Antichrist  was  either  a  political  power 
or  personality,  such  as  the  emperor  of  the  world  empire. 
However,  when  Christianity  became  the  religion  of  the 
State,  this  view  lost  its  force,  although  there  were  many 
pious  and  thoughtful  souls  who  viewed  with  sorrow  the 
Antichristian  tendencies  within  the  Church.  We  ought  to 
bear  in  mind,  however,  that  even  during  the  Apologetical 
period  the  view  was  prevalent  that  Antichrist  was  an  in- 
dividual who  would  appear  shortly  before  the  advent  of 
Christ.  This  view  was  supported  by  Justin  Martyr,  Ire- 
naeus  and  others  of  their  day,  and  later  by  Chrysostom, 
Jerome  and  Augustine.  During  the  seventh  and  especially 
during  the  eighth  century  as  well  as  during  the  Middle  Ages 
the  assumption  prevailed  that  Mohammedanism  was  Anti- 
christ. But  even  during  this  time  there  were  some  who 
believed  that  Antichrist  would  be  a  person  who  would  ap- 
pear at  the  end  of  the  world.  Joachim  of  Floris  said  that 
Antichrist  would  be  a  universalis  pontifex  and  therefore 
concluded  that  some  pope  would  appear  as  Antichrist.  It 
is  generally  believed  that  Amalrik  of  Bena  was  the  first 
to  teach  clearly  that  the  Roman  Hierarchy  was  the  Anti- 
christ, in  which  view  the  Waldensians  and  the  Hussites  con- 
curred, holding  that  the  papacy  was  Antichrist.  In  the 
Schmalcald  Articles  it  is  stated  that  the  Pope  is  Antichrist. 
The  specific  reference  is  as  follows:*  "Haec  doctrina  prae- 
clare  ostendit  papam  esse  ipsum  verum  antichristum."  The 
Apology**  states  that  the  Papacy  is  a  part  of  the  kingdom 
of  Antichrist.  Luther  said  that  the  Pope  was  Antichrist, 
but  he  also  said  that  the  Turk  was  the  little  horn. t  The  old 
Dogmaticians  called  the  papacy  the  occidental  Antichrist 
and  Mohammedanism  and  the  Turkish  power  the  oriental. 
However,  they  stated  that  the  doctrine  of  the  Antichrist  is 
}i07i  fundamentalif^. 

The  historical  school  of  prophecy  takes  the  position  that 

*  Miiller.  Symb.  Biicher,  p.  308.  10. 
**  Muller,  Symb.  Biicher,  p.  209,  18. 
t  Köstlin.  Theology  of  Luther.  Book  4,  chapter  IX. 


THE   LAST   TIMES.  505 

the  Papacy  is  Antichrist.  The  reasons  advanced,  among 
others,  are  the  following:  The  Papal  Church  represents  the 
apostasy  described  in  2  Thess.  2:3;  the  sale  of  indulgences 
in  the  Roman  Church  ;  the  desire  of  the  Papacy  for  temporal 
power;  forbidding  the  laity  to  read  the  Word  of  God;  the 
sacerdotal  and  hierarchial  system  within  the  Roman  Church  ; 
Jesuitism,  the  Inquisition,  the  power  of  the  Popes,  the  dogma 
of  infallibility,  the  adoration  of  the  saints,  the  worship  of 
images  and  relics,  supposed  miracles,  etc.  On  mature  con- 
sideration it  cannot  be  denied  that  the  reasons  adduced  in 
support  of  the  contention  are  potent.  Furthermore,  we  do 
not  know  what  forces  may  be  concealed  in  the  Roman  Church 
which  may  develop  into  even  more  Antichristian  tendencies 
and  finally  culminate  into  Antichrist  himself.  There  is 
nothing  in  the  Confessions  which  militates  against  the  posi- 
tion that  Antichrist  will  appear  in  personal  form.  The 
quotation  from  the  Schmalcald  Articles  states  that  the  Pope 
is  truly  the  Antichrist.  Even  if  the  expression  Pope  is 
interpreted  to  mean  the  Papacy,  still  the  system  must  have 
a  personal  head.  The  expression  in  the  Apology  that  the 
Papacy  is  a  part  of  the  kingdom  of  Antichrist  would  indi- 
cate that  this  kingdom  embraces  more  than  the  Roman 
Catholic  Church.  In  studying  closely  2  Thess.  2 :  3 — 10,  we 
find  first  the  expression  åwoarao-ia  and  then  o  avOpwiro<;  t^s 
tti/o/xta?  or  o  avofjio^.  The  first  expression  may  signify  false 
Christianity  in  general  and  the  Papacy  in  particular,  while 
the  latter  expressions,  the  "man  of  sin"  and  the  "lawless 
one,"  refer  to  the  culmination  of  Antichrist  in  a  personal 
head  as  a  representative  of  the  Antichristian  political  and 
ecclesiastical  development.  Philippi,  who  represents  the 
old  dogmatic  conservative  view,  says:  "No  Lutheran  can 
or  may  doubt  that  the  Papacy  is  Antichristian,  even  if  he 
cannot  consider  it  the  final  form  and  culmination  of  Anti- 
christ." There  are  many  Lutheran  theologians  who  hold 
the  view  that  the  fully  developed  form  of  Antichrist  will  be 
consummated  in  an  individual  so  that  a  personal  Antichrist 
will  appear  before  the  second  coming  of  Christ.  They  be- 
lieve that  this  personal  Antichrist  will  have  been  preceded 


506  KsonA-roi.or.Y. 

by  many  types,  such  as  Antiochus  Ephiphanes,  Moham- 
medanism and  the  Papacy.  John  speaks  af  many  anti- 
christs: "And  as  ye  have  heard  that  antichrist  cometh,  even 
now  have  there  arisen  many  antichrists ;  whereby  we  know 
that  it  is  the  last  hour"  (1  John  2:  18)  ;  'This  is  the  anti- 
christ, even  he  that  denieth  the  Father  and  the  Son"  (1  John 
2 :  22)  ;  "Every  spirit  that  confesseth  not  Jesus  is  not  of 
God  :  and  this  is  the  spirit  of  the  antichrist,  whereof  ye  have 
heard  that  it  cometh;  and  even  now  it  is  in  the  world  al- 
ready" (1  John  4:3).  We  have  already  stated  that  Luther 
interpreted  the  little  horn  of  Daniel  to  be  the  Turk.  He, 
therefore,  did  not  refer  it  to  the  Papacy.  Rev,  13  speaks 
of  two  beasts.  Some  commentators  have  supported  the  view 
that  the  beast  which  John  saw  coming  up  out  of  the  earth 
more  particularly  represents  Antichrist  in  personal  form, 
while  the  beast  that  he  saw  coming  up  out  of  the  sea  repre- 
sents the  position  of  the  historical  school  with  relation  to 
Antichrist.  Philippi*  says  that  the  first  beast  represents 
the  worldly  side  of  Antichrist,  while  the  second  beast  repre- 
sents the  spiritual  and  religious  side.  He  declares  that  the 
second  beast  is  the  Papacy  considered  as  a  heretical  Church. 
Frank**  says  that  the  Roman  caricature  of  Christianity 
will  always  constitute  an  essential  element  in  the  presenta- 
tion of  the  final  Antichrist,  which  he  considered  personal. 

We  here  set  forth  a  number  of  Biblical  expressions  which 
would  seem  to  indicate  that  the  present  form  of  Antichris- 
tianity  will  in  its  final  development  appear  in  a  more  per- 
sonal form.  It  is  clearly  evident  that  the  little  horn  in 
Daniel  must  be  an  Antichristian  prince  who  represents  the 
world  power  as  opposed  to  Christianity.  Compare  Daniel 
7  :  23—27 ;  8  :  23—25  ;  11 :  36—45.  The  words  of  our  Lord 
in  John  5 :  43  also  seem  to  indicate  that  Antichrist  will 
appear  in  personal  form.  The  Lord  says:  "I  am  come  in 
my  Father's  name,  and  ye  receive  me  not:  if  another  shall 
come  in  his  own  name,  him  ye  will  receive."  It  is  not  un- 
believeable,  rather  it  is  very  probable,  that  Satan  will  finally 

*  Kirchliche  Glaubenslehre,  VI.  pp.  171,  172. 
♦*  System  der  Christlichc  Wahrheit.  zweite  Aufl..  zweite  Hälfte,  p.  470. 


THE  LAST  TIMES.  507 

find  a  personal  servant  who  will  be  willing  to  serve  and 
worship  him.  As  a  recompense  such  a  person  will  receive 
the  kingdom  of  the  world.  Compare  Matt.  4 :  9.  Christ  has 
prophesied  that  in  the  last  times  false  Christs  and  false 
prophets  will  arise.  Compare  Matt.  24:  23,  24.  Not  only 
the  Jews  but  also  others  expect  a  Messiah.  The  dragon,  the 
father  of  lies,  will  send  forth  the  son  of  perdition  and  to- 
gether with  him  another  beast  who  will  finally  appear  as 
a  great  wonder-working  false  prophet.  These  three  will 
constitute  a  diabolical  trinity.  With  regard  to  the  coming 
of  the  "lawless  one"  Paul  says  in  2  Thess.  2:9:  "Whose 
coming  is  according  to  the  working  of  Satan  with  all  power 
and  signs  and  lying  wonders."  Cf.  Rev.  13 :  2.  With  regard 
to  the  "lawless  one"  it  is  stated  in  2  Thess.  2:  8,  "whom 
the  Lord  Jesus  shall  slay  with  the  breath  of  his  mouth,  and 
bring  him  to  nought  by  the  manifestation  of  his  coming." 
Comparing  this  passage  with  Rev.  19 :  20  we  find  that  these 
passages  seem  to  confirm  the  view  that  an  individual  person 
is  referred  to,  indeed,  that  the  final  appearance  of  the  beast 
will  be  personal,  inasmuch  as  the  first  beast  and  the  false 
prophet  are  both  to  be  taken  and  cast  alive  into  the  lake  of 
fire  that  burneth  with  brimstone.  Compare  also  Daniel  7 : 
26;  8:  25;  11:  45.  Study  the  presentation  of  the  beast  in 
Rev.  13  and  compare  it  with  Rev.  17 :  3 — 13.  Generally 
speaking,  the  first  beast  is  a  symbolical  presentation  of 
world  power  revealed  in  its  fully  developed  form,  for  which 
reason  the  ten  horns  are  mentioned  first.  The  seven  heads, 
of  which  it  is  said  that  five  are  fallen,  are  taken  to  mean 
seven  successive  powers  among  the  kingdoms  of  the  world. 
The  first  that  had  already  fallen  were  Egypt,  Assyria,  Baby- 
lon, Persia  and  Greece.  In  Rev.  13 :  2  the  leopard  is  men- 
tioned as  referring  to  the  Greek  or  Macedonian  power,  the 
bear  to  the  Medo-Persian  power,  and  the  lion  to  the  Baby- 
lonian power.  The  sixth  power  is  the  Roman.  Daniel 
makes  mention  of  only  four  powers,  the  fourth  being  the 
Roman  power.  According  to  Daniel  the  ten  horns  or  ten 
kings  and  kingdoms  arise  out  of  the  Roman  power  and 
afterwards  the  little  horn  which  was  to  overcome  three 


508  ESCHatoi.oc;y. 

horns  or  kings  and  kingdoms.  A  close  study  of  Daniel  8:  9 
will  show  that  the  little  horn  is  to  arise  out  of  that  portion 
of  the  Roman  power  which  formerly  belonged  to  the  Greek 
or  Macedonian  power.  It  is  therefore  especially  noteworthy 
that  we  read  in  Rev.  13 :  2 :  "And  the  beast  which  I  saw 
was  like  unto  a  leopard."  With  regard  to  the  seventh  head 
we  read  in  Rev.  17 :  10 :  "When  he  cometh,  he  must  continue 
a  little  while."  This  must  refer  to  a  new  form  of  the 
Roman  power,  but  this  power  would  not  long  endure.*  The 
seventh  head  cannot  be  the  Papacy,  inasmuch  as  it  has  al- 
ready existed  a  long  time  and  still  possesses  great  power. 
However,  the  Roman  Church  stands  in  close  relationship 
with  the  Roman  world  power.  Many  Bible  commentators 
consider  that  the  great  harlot  represents  all  false  religions 
and  especially  the  false  Church  which  is  enthroned  in  the 
spiritual  Babylon  or  Rome.  According  to  Rev.  17 :  3  the 
great  harlot  was  seen  sitting  upon  the  scarlet-colored  beast. 
The  beast  is  one  of  the  seven,  and  yet  he  is  the  eighth. 
Compare  Rev.  17:  11,  12:  "And  the  beast  that  was,  and  is 
not,  is  himself  also  an  eighth,  and  is  of  the  seven ;  and  he 
goeth  into  perdition.  And  the  ten  horns  that  thou  sawest 
are  ten  kings,  who  have  received  no  kingdom  as  yet;  but 
they  receive  authority  as  kings,  with  the  beast,  for  one 
hour."  The  final  form  of  the  world  power  will  therefore 
consist  in  a  confederation  of  ten  kings  and  kingdoms.  All  of 
these  kings  have  one  mind,  and  they  give  their  power  and 
authority  unto  the  beast.  In  this  way  the  beast  makes  his 
appearance  as  a  world  prince.  The  first  beast  has  been  sup- 
ported during  the  course  of  historical  development  by  the 
second  beast.  Compare  Rev.  13:  11 — 17.  When  the  first 
beast  has  developed  to  such  an  extent  that  the  son  of  perdi- 
tion makes  his  appearance  upon  the  scene  of  world  action, 
then  he  will  be  powerfully  supported  by  the  great  false 
prophet.    Although  it  is  true  that  the  second  beast  is  repre- 

*  Many  exegetes  say  that  the  seventh  head  is  the  Napoleonic  empire. 
Auberlin  holds  that  it  is  the  Germano-Slavic.  The  geographic  position 
and  the  short  existence  of  both  favor  one  of  these  views.  The  Napo- 
leonic and  German  empires  did  not  last  long.  The  eighth,  which  is  also 
one  of  the  seven,  is  then  the  next  head. 


THE  LAST  TIMES.  509 

sented  in  every  false  system  of  religion,  still  the  content 
of  Rev.  13:  11 — 17  proves  that  only  an  individual  person 
will  answer  fully  the  prophetical  description  of  the  second 
beast.  The  time  set  for  the  activity  of  the  beast  would  like- 
wise seem  to  prove  that  the  final  form  of  the  Antichristian 
power  is  to  be  personal.  Compare  Rev.  13 :  5 :  "And  there 
was  given  to  him  authority  to  continue  forty  and  two 
months,"  which  corresponds  to  the  1260  days  or  three  and 
a  half  years.  The  historical  school  says  that  the  1260  days 
are  1260  years,  but  by  reason  of  the  description  of  the  same 
time  in  terms  of  months  the  indication  would  seem  to  be 
that  the  time  ought  to  be  interpreted  literally,  although  it 
is  possible  that  in  a  symbolical  and  historical  sense  the  days 
may  also  represent  years,  as  in  a  grand  rehearsal  reaching 
its  climax  in  a  literal  fulfillment  of  so  many  days.  In  the 
latter  case  the  time  indicated  would  have  reference  to  the 
most  important  period  in  the  history  of  Antichristianity, 
the  occidental  as  well  as  the  oriental.* 

*  Although,  strictly  speaking,  it  does  not  come  within  the  province 
of  Dogmatics  to  set  forth  the  various  chronological  calculations  of  the 
different  schools  of  prophetic  thought  and  interpretation,  still  for  the 
sake  of  completeness  it  is  necessary  to  set  forth  by  way  of  illustration 
the  following  brief  summary  of  chronological  data  especially  as  used 
in  the  historical  school.  We  hasten  to  remark,  however,  tliat  calcula- 
tions of  this  sort  are  only  of  comparative  value,  inasmuch  as  the  study 
of  chronology  in  connection  with  prophecy  is  encumbered  with  diffi- 
culties that  the  fulfillment  of  prophecy  alone  can  solve.  The  historical 
school  generally  interprets  a  day  to  mean  a  year.  A  "time"  is  360 
years.  Therefore  it  is  assumed  that  1260,  1290,  1335  and  2300  days 
mean  so  many  years,  either  solar  or  lunar  years.  For  instance,  in  Rev. 
10,  which  is  taken  to  have  reference  to  the  Reformation,  it  is  stated 
in  verse  6  that  there  shall  be  delay  (time)  no  longer.  This  is  inter- 
preted to  mean  that  hardly  a  "time"  shall  elapse  between  some  im- 
portant year  connected  with  the  Reformation  and  the  events  that  shall 
transpire  before  the  judgment  period.  Manifestly  such  calculations  are 
uncertain.  But  some  of  them  are  interesting.  Adding  "a  time"  (360 
years)  to  1510,  when  Luther,  on  Pilate's  staircase  in  Rome,  was  re- 
minded of  the  words,  "The  just  shall  live  by  faith,"  we  come  to  1870, 
when  the  Pope  lost  his  temporal  power.  All  the  leading  dates  in  the 
Reformation  era  have  led  to  or  may  lead  to  important  events  in  modern 
times  by  similar  calculations.  In  the  same  manner  it  is  stated  that 
the  times  of  the  Gentiles  are  equal  to  seven  "times"  or  2520  years.  The 
main  Scripture  passage  cited  is  Lev.  26.  There  is  no  unanimity  in 
determining  the  terminus  a  quo,  but  Nebuchadnezzar's  vision  of  the 
image  is  taken  to  be  a  description  of  the  times  of  the  Gentiles,  which 
becomes  the  determining  factor  in  fixing  the  terminus  a  quo.  The 
times  of  the  Gentiles  as  to  terminus  a  quo  is  usually  counted  frcm  som-» 


510  K.SCIIAlX)r.OGY. 

3.    The  Signs  of  the  Last  Times. 

Signa  temporis  sive  diei  novissimi  are,  among  others: 
1)  Remota,  among  which  may  be  mentioned:  a)  the  con- 
tinued victory  of  truth  and  the  judgments  of  history;  com- 
pare Rev.  6:  2,  which  deals  with  the  first  seal;  Isa.  26:  9; 
Ps.  64:  7 — 9;  110:  1 — 3;  b)  wars  and  rumors  of  wars; 
compare  Rev.  6 :  4,  which  deals  with  the  second  seal ;  Matt. 
24:  6;  Mark  13:  7;  Luke  21:  9;  c)  famine;  compare  Rev. 
6 :  5,  6,  where  the  third  seal  is  described ;  Matt.  24 :  7  ;  Mark 

important  date  in  the  reign  of  Nebuchadnezzar.  If  we  add  2520  years 
to  the  earliest  year  of  this  king,  we  reach  1914,  the  beginning  of  the 
late  World  War.  This  year  became  a  link  in  the  chain  binding  the 
prophecies  together  to  sliow  the  approach  of  a  new  Jewish  era  or  his- 
tory. Nebuchadnezzar  ascended  the  throne  the  year  604 — 3.  Add  the 
2520  years  and  we  reach  the  year  1917,  when  Jerusalem  was  delivered 
to  the  English.  We  come  to  the  same  year,  if  we  count  from  622,  the 
beginning  of  the  Hegira  period  or  starting  point  of  the  Mohammedan 
calendar  and  use  the  lunar  scale.  It  was  a  great  blow  to  the  Turkish 
power  when  Jerusalem  was  captured  or  occupied  by  the  English  in 
December,  1917.  The  2300  days  in  Daniel  8:  14  mean  as  many  years 
and  the  starting  point  is  taken  to  be  either  the  seventh  or  the  twentieth 
year  of  the  reign  of  Artaxerxes  Longimanus.  At  the  conclusion  of  this 
period  (1844 — 1856),  the  Turkish  power  would  begin  to  wane  and 
correspondingly  brighten  the  prospects  of  the  Jews  to  reoccupy  the 
Promised  Land.  And  it  is  a  fact  that  the  Turkish  power  began  to  go 
to  pieces  in  that  decennary.  The  Historical  school  of  prophecy  claims 
that  the  30  and  45  days  in  Dan.  12:  11,  12  added  as  years  to  the  1260 
days  or  years  makes  a  difference  of  75  years,  which  makes  1335  days 
or  years.  If  the  75  years  are  added  to  the  decennary  1844 — 1856,  we 
reach  first  1918 — 1919,  when  Palestine  in  fact  was  taken  from  the 
Turks,  and  later  we  also  reach  the  period  of  more  and  more  Christian 
and  Jewish  occupancy  of  Palestine.  If  the  2520  years  are  counted  from 
the  capture  of  Zedekiah  and  the  burning  of  tlie  temple  in  the  year 
B.  C.  587,  the  time  is  so  much  more  extended  to  remove  hindrances 
standing  in  the  way  of  the  return  of  the  Jews.  Independent  of  the 
calculations  of  the  length  of  the  Times  of  the  Gentiles,  these  times  will 
end  and  the  Gentiles  cease  to  tread  down  Jerusalem,  when  the  Lord 
interferes  and  overcomes  the  enemies  of  the  Jewish  people.  The 
present  events  and  attempts  to  settle  the  Jews  in  Palestine  are  signs 
of  the  times  which  should  be  carefully  studied. 

We.  would  especially  call  attention  to  the  calculation  of  the  historical 
school  in  regard  to  the  duration  of  the  reigning  power  of  Antichrist. 
It  is  assumed  that  the  power  of  the  occidental  as  well  as  the  oriental 
Antichrists  would  last  from  1260  to  1335  years.  Compare  Dan.  12  and 
Rev.  13.  The  historical  school  says  42  months,  1260  days  and  the  ex- 
pressions "time,"  "times,"  and  "half  a  time"  correspond  to  1260  years 
Inasmuch  as  the  Roman  world  power  delayed  (2  Thess.  2:  6)  the  estab- 
lishment of  the  Papacy,  therefore  the  Antichristian  period  of  the 
Papacy  is  counted  either  from  the  fall  of  Rome  or  from  the  time  that 
the  Pope  received  temporal  power  or  was  recognized  by  Justinian  and 
Phocas  as  the  head  of  the  Christian  Church    (between  the  years  533 


THE   LAST   -nMES.  511 

13:  8;  Luke  21:  11;  d)  pestilence  and  other  misfortunes; 
compare  Rev.  6 :  8,  where  the  fourth  seal  is  described ;  Matt. 
24:  7;  Mark  13:  8;  Luke  21:  11;  e).  persecutions;  Rev.  6: 
9,  containing-  a  description  of  the  fifth  seal ;  Matt.  24 :  8,  9 ; 
Mark  13:  9;  Luke  21 :  12.  These  signs  continue  throughout 
a  protracted  period,  while  the  sufferings  which  are  por- 
trayed vary  as  to  degree.  It  is  also  evident  that  these  signs 
may  occur  successively  or  simultaneously.  We  may  there- 
fore say  that  these  signs  are  of  a  more  general  nature  and 
do  not  constitute  a  clear  indication  of  the  near  approach 

and  607  or  610).  The  power  of  Mohammedanism  is  counted  from  some 
important  year  in  the  life  of  Mohammed  or  from  the  year  of  the  con- 
quest of  Jerusalem  by  the  Saracens  and  the  building  of  the  Mosque 
of  Omar  on  the  temple  area  in  Jerusalem.  The  Mosque  of  Omar  is 
supposed  to  be  the  abomination  of  desolation.  Sometimes  the  time  of 
the  oriental  Antichrist  is  reckoned  in  lunar  years.  The  1260  lunar 
years  correspond  to  1222  solar  years  and  1290  lunar  years  to  1250  solar 
years.  There  are  many  striking  results  which  can  be  obtained  by 
means  of  calculations  from  different  starting  points  in  Roman  and 
Mohammedan  history.  Let  us  mention  one  example.  From  the  death 
of  Phocas  in  610  to  1870  is  just  1260  years.  The  Pope  lost  his  temporal 
power  in  1870,  but  he  still  possesses  great  political  power  indirectly. 
The  historical  school,  however,  points  out  the  extension  of  30  and  45 
years  beyond  the  1260  years  spoken  of  in  Daniel  12.  We  ought  to  state 
that  not  all  adherents  of  the  historical  school  follow  these  calculations. 
Without  going  into  further  detail,  we  desire  to  express  the  assumption 
that  if  the  1260  days  do  not  represent  a  round  number  symbolically, 
then  they  represent  so  many  days  literally.  On  account  of  the  seventy 
weeks  in  Dan.  9,  being  year-weeks,  it  is  possible  or  even  probable  that 
the  days  in  Daniel  mean  years.  Dan.  12:  6,  7  seems  to  favor  the  year- 
day  theory,  but  verses  8 — 12,  speaking  of  "the  issue  of  these  things," 
uphold  the  literal  day  theory.  The  Revelation  of  John  treats  prin- 
cipally of  the  issue  or  the  so-called  last  times.  The  thousand  years 
could  not  mean  so  many  days.  The  usage  of  days  and  months  favors 
the  literal  day  theory.  In  Rev.  13  the  1260  days  correspond  to  42 
months,  which  strengthens  the  literal  interpretation.  The  latter  inter- 
pretation is  further  strengthened  in  Rev.  11,  where  the  two  witnesses 
are  mentioned,  and  these  must  be  real  persons.  The  days  in  verses 
3,  9  and  11  must  be  literal  days.  The  1260  days  mark  the  culmination 
in  the  development  of  the  Antichristian  power  as  well  as  the  period 
of  great  tribulation.  We  would  not  deny  that  the  above-mentioned 
calculations  may  have  their  significance  in  typifying  on  a  great  scale 
that  which  at  the  end  of  this  age  will  appear  in  more  concentrated  and 
limited  form.  The  Lord  says:  "And  except  those  days  had  been 
shortened,  no  flesh  would  have  been  saved:  but  for  the  elect's  sake 
those  days  shall  be  shortened"  (Matt.  24:  22).  — It  behooves  us  to 
exercise  the  greatest  care  in  the  interpretation  of  the  data  of  prophecy 
which  indeed  are  not  given  to  us  in  order  to  satisfy  our  human  curi- 
osity, but  for  the  comfort  and  the  guidance  of  the  Christian  Church 
and  especially  of  such  Christians  as  are  alive  during  those  critical 
periods.  In  the  time  of  fulfillment  the  mysterious  will  become  clear 
and  the  numbers  also  will  assist  men  in  watching  the  signs  of  the  time. 


512  KSCUAIOI.OGV. 

of  the  last  day.  P'or  this  reason  our  Lord  warns  His  dis- 
ciples, saying-:  "Take  heed  that  ye  be  not  led  astray:  for 
many  shall  come  in  my  name,  saying,  I  am  he;  and,  The 
time  is  at  hand :  go  ye  not  after  them.  And  when  ye  shall 
hear  of  wars  and  tumults,  be  not  terrified:  for  these  things 
must  needs  come  to  pass  first;  but  the  end  is  not  imme- 
diately" (Luke  21:  8,  9). 

2)  Propinqua,  among  which  may  be  counted  the  follow- 
ing: a)  the  apostasy  {å-n-on-Tua-ia,  mentioned  especially  in  2 
Thess.  2:  3),  which  shall  continue  a  long  time  and  ripen 
toward  the  end.  In  a  certain  sense  the  "falling  away" 
began  early  in  the  history  of  the  Church.  Compare  Acts 
20:  29,  30;  1  John  2:  18,  19;  4:  3.  But  the  true  Church  of 
Christ  continues  nevertheless  in  spite  of  the  apostasy  and 
continues  to  win  great  victories.  This  was  very  clearly 
seen  during  the  Reformation  period.  However,  the  old 
apostasy  has  not  ceased,  and  new  apostasies  have  taken 
place.  "And  many  false  prophets  shall  arise,  and  shall  lead 
many  astray"  (Matt.  24:  11)  ;  b)  increasing  unbelief,  the 
old  heathenism  appearing  in  new  forms;  "For  the  time  will 
come  when  they  will  not  endure  the  sound  doctrine;  but 
having  itching  ears,  will  heap  to  themselves  teachers  after 
their  own  lusts;  and  will  turn  away  their  ears  from  the 
truth,  and  turn  aside  unto  fables"  (2  Tim.  4 :  3,  4)  ;  c)  great 
increase  of  spiritual  knowledge  (Daniel  12:  4)  and  the 
rapid  growth  of  the  sciences;  d)  general  feeling  of  security 
and  self-confidence  by  reason  of  wonderful  human  progress. 
Compare  Isa.  47:  7;  Rev.  18:  7;  2  Peter  3:4;  e)  watchful 
and  prayerful  waiting  on  the  part  of  the  Christians  for  the 
coming  of  the  Lord.  Compare  Luke  12 :  36 ;  1  Thess.  5 : 
4—6. 

3)  Propinquiora,  among  which  we  wish  to  point  out  the 
following:    a)   Spiritualism,  or  the  doctrine  of  evil  spirits 

{irpo(Ti-)(ovTt<i    iri'evfXMTW   TrXai'ois    xal    StSutTKuAt'uts    baLfxoviwi',     1   Tim.    4'. 

1)  ;  b)  diflScult  social  problems.  Compare  2  Tim.  3:  1 — 4; 
c)  political  signs,  causing  grave  anxiety  by  reason  of  great 
disturbances,  which  occur  toward  the  close  of  the  present 
world  dominion  before  the  beast  has  made  his  appearance 


THE   LAST   TIMES.  513 

in  fully  developed  form.  Compare  Daniel  2 :  41 — 43 ;  7  :  7 ; 
8:9;  d)  the  spirit  of  indifference  in  the  Christian  Church, 
the  Laodicean  period.  Compare  Rev.  3  :  15 — 17 ;  Matt.  25  : 
5;  Luke  17:  26 — 29;  e)  the  increasing-  power  of  lawless- 
ness. Compare  Matt.  24:  12;  f)  the  beginning  of  the  end 
of  the  dispersion  of  the  children  of  Israel,  accompanied  by 
signs  which  will  mark  the  close  of  the  times  of  the  Gentiles. 
Compare  Daniel  12:  7;  Luke  21:  24.  Some  of  the  Bible 
statements  refer  to  the  restoration  from  Babel,  others  speak 
plainly  of  a  restoration  from  all  parts  of  the  earth.  "And 
it  shall  come  to  pass  in  that  day,  that  the  Lord  will  set  his 
hand  again  the  second  time  to  recover  the  remnant  of  his 
people.  .  .and  from  the  islands  of  the  sea.  And  he  will  set 
up  an  ensign  for  the  nations,  and  will  assemble  the  outcasts 
of  Israel  and  gather  together  the  dispersed  of  Judah  from 
the  four  corners  of  the  earth"  (Isa.  11:  11,  12).  There  are 
many  passages  which  plainly  prove  that  there  will  be  a 
more  national  return  to  the  Holy  Land  than  the  present 
immigration.  And  yet  the  returning  Jews  from  Babylon 
numbered  only  about  fifty  thousand.  The  Christian  occu- 
pancy of  Palestine  will  further  Jewish  immigration  and 
colonization.  The  second  restoration  will  also  include  Isra- 
elites of  the  ten  tribes.  All  these  things  may  seem  impos- 
sible, but  God  will  accomplish  it  when  the  time  is  ripe. 
The  first  return  of  a  greater  number  by  various  influences 
does  not  imply  a  conversion  to  Christianity.  On  account 
of  Mohammedan  resistance  to  the  colonization  of  Jews  and 
rebuilding  of  the  temple  and  also  by  political  hindrances, 
there  may  be  a  delay  in  forming  a  Jewish  state.  This  may 
finally  lead  to  the  "firm  covenant"  spoken  of  in  Dan,  9:  27. 
If  the  "little  horn"  or  the  "prince  that  shall  come,"  see 
verses  26,  27,  promises  the  Jews  an  independent  state,  they 
may  accept  him  as  a  Messiah.  Christ  said:  "I  am  come  in 
my  Father's  name,  and  ye  receive  me  not;  if  another  shall 
come  in  his  own  name,  him  ye  will  receive"  (John  5:  43). 
The  forming  of  such  a  state  under  a  false  Messiah  is  not 
the  restoration  promised  by  God.    The  real  restoration  will 


514  KSCIIATOLOGT. 

come  later  after  the  great  tribulation*  ;  g)  calamitous  visi- 
tations, such  as  the  continually  recurring  signa  remota, 
which  become  increasingly  apparent  and  significant.  Earth- 
quakes, storms,  disasters,  pestilence,  famine,  wars  and  ru- 
mors of  wars  and  similar  plagues  will  take  place  here  and 
there  in  the  world  and  will  increase  in  frequency.  But  in 
spite  of  these  visitations  everything  will  be  as  usual.  The 
work  of  the  Church  will  continue.  The  times  will  become 
better  and  worse.  The  children  of  this  world  will  not  un- 
derstand the  signs  of  the  times  and  will  explain  them  in  the 

♦  The  restoration  promised  in  the  prophets  is  often  referred  to.  "In 
that  day  Jehovah  made  a  covenant  with  Abram,  saying,  Unto  thy  seed 
have  I  given  this  land,  from  the  river  of  Egypt  unto  the  great  river, 
the  river  Euphrates"  (Gen.  15:  18).  In  regard  to  the  future  of  Israel, 
read  Deut.  30 — 33;  Hosea  14;  Isaiah  11:  11,  12;  such  a  passage  cannot 
be  spiritualized;  Jeremiah  30:  2,  3;  31:  10,  33,  34.  referring  to  their 
national  conversion;  Zech.  12:  10 — 13:  1;  this  passage  in  Zechariah 
does  not  only  speak  of  an  outpouring  of  the  Spirit  upon  the  house  of 
David  and  the  inhabitants  of  Jerusalem,  but  brings  before  us,  how 
Jehovah  speaks  of  Himself  as  pierced.  The  Jews  will  then  know  whom 
they  crucified,  and  then  follows  the  national  mourning.  The  last 
chapter  of  Zechariah  presents  the  nation  as  delivered  and  restored. 
In  the  New  Testament  prophecies  Luke  1:  30 — 33  is  usually  spiritual- 
ized in  regard  to  the  last  three  'shalls,'  but  there  are  many  exegetes 
who  hold  that  these  three  'shalls'  must  be  literally  fulfilled,  just  as  the 
four  preceding.  Not  all  of  these  interpreters  hold  the  view  that  the 
Lord  will  occupy  an  earthly  throne,  but  that  the  Lord  will  rule  from 
the  heavenly  Jerusalem,  "coming  down  out  of  heaven  from  God,"  and 
rule  over  the  house  of  Jacob  as  David's  son.  This  would  not  come  in 
conflict  with  the  universal  kingship  of  the  Lord,  and  does  not  prevent 
the  prominence  of  the  old  Jerusalem  in  a  theocratic  kingdom  during 
a  possible  millennial  age.  And  the  King  of  kings  can  appear  in  Jeru- 
salem and  other  places.  The  second  advent  of  the  Lord  does  not  mean 
a  short  stay  and  then  another  ascension  and  withdrawal.  If  the  Lord 
visits  different  parts  of  His  kingdom  and  His  throne  is  in  the  Jerusa- 
lem from  above,  there  is  no  real  absence  of  the  King  and  no  cessation 
of  the  second  advent.  He  will  never  more  leave  the  saints.  There  are 
many  passages  in  regard  to  the  restoration  and  the  kingdom  of  God 
during  the  transition  period  and  the  full  establishment  of  the  eternal 
kingdom.  Such  passages  belong  to  exegesis  and  not  to  Dogmatics 
Among  such  passages  we  only  call  attention  to  a  few,  such  as  Amos 
9:  11—15;  Isaiah  2:  2—4;  Jer.  33:  14—18;  in  the  study  of  the  18th 
verse  we  should  follow  the  law  of  Hermeneutics.  that  the  clear  pas- 
sages must  explain  the  dark  and  mysterious  and  not  the  reverse.  When 
the  Jews  accept  Christianity,  they  will  not  continue  to  offer  burnt- 
offerings  for  sin.  The  epistle  to  the  Hebrews  and  the  whole  New  Testa- 
ment proves  it.  There  are  also  similar  problems  of  exegesis  in  regard 
to  Ezekiel's  new  temple.  As  there  cannot  be  any  contradictions  in  the 
Bible,  all  problems  will  be  solved.  The  following  passages  may  also 
be  specially  interesting  in  exegetical  research:  Ezekiel  44:  1 — 3;  45: 
7;  compare  Isaiah  32:  1,  2;  Zech.  14:  9—21. 


THE  LAäT  TIMES.  515 

natural  way.  With  regard  to  many  the  saying  of  Scripture 
will  find  application :  "And  they  repented  not  of  their  mur- 
ders, nor  of  their  sorceries,  nor  of  their  fornication,  nor 
of  their  thefts"  (Rev.  9:  21)  ;  compare  Rev.  8  and  9  with 
regard  to  the  six  trumpets,  which  may  be  reckoned  as  signa 
propinquiora.  It  may  be  said  with  regard  to  the  time  char- 
acterized by  these  signs:  "But  all  these  things  are  the  be- 
ginning of  travail"  (Matt.  24:  8). 

4)  Proxvma  are  the  signs  which  occur  immediately  before 
the  revelation  or  epiphany  of  Christ.  We  would  point  out 
the  following:  a)  the  preaching  of  the  Gospel  in  the  whole 
world  for  a  testimony  unto  all  the  nations.  Compare  Matt. 
24:  14;  Mark  13:  10;  b)  the  culminating  activity  of  the 
beast  and  his  last  personal  manifestation.  Compare  Dan. 
2:  44;  7:  24—26;  8:  23—26;  11:  31—45;  2  Thess.  2:  8,  9; 
Rev.  13;  17:  11 — 13;  c)  the  abomination  of  desolation. 
The  golden  image  of  Nebuchadnezzar  (Daniel  3)  is  a  type 
of  the  abomination  of  desolation.  Daniel  9 :  27  makes  men- 
tion of  this  abomination.  Literally  translated  the  words 
read :  Upon  the  wing  of  abominations,  the  desolator.  The 
desolator  or  the  so-called  little  horn  or  the  beast  is  borne, 
as  it  were,  upon  the  wing  of  abominations  into  power. 
These  abominations  may  include  all  the  evil  powers  and  in- 
fluences which  labor  together  in  the  final  development  and 
expression  of  Antichristianity.  The  abomination  of  desola- 
tion, spoken  of  as  standing  in  the  holy  place,  has  reference 
to  the  image  of  the  beast  set  forth  in  Rev.  13 :  14,  15 ;  com- 
pare Daniel  3  :  1—15 ;  9 :  27 ;  11 :  31 ;  12 :  11 ;  Matt.  24 :  15^' ; 

*  In  order  to  understand  better  the  development  leading  to  the 
abomination  of  desolation,  remember  the  covenant  (Dan.  9:  27)  which 
will  be  made  by  the  false  Messiah  with  the  returned  Jews.  Correct 
exegesis  is  here  very  important.  The  best  modern  exegetes  hold  that 
"the  anointed  one,  the  prince"  in  the  25th  verse  is  not  the  same  as 
the  prince  in  the  latter  part  of  the  26th  verse,  which  prince  will  be  the 
little  horn  or  the  Anticlirist.  The  anointed  one  in  the  25th  verse  and 
in  the  beginning  of  the  26th  verse  is  Christ  or  the  true  Messiah.  From 
a  certain  decree  issued  to  rebuild  Jerusalem  during  the  rule  of  Arta- 
xerxes  483  years  should  elapse  until  Christ.  Some  claim  that  the 
anointing  refers  to  the  Baptism  of  Christ,  and  others  say  it  refers  to 
the  entrance  of  Christ  into  Jerusalem  on  Palm  Sunday.  In  either  case- 
it  is  a  remarkable  fulfillment  of  prophecy.  Many  commentators  hold 
that  the  70th  year-week  should  be  continuous  with  the  69.  It  seems 
to  them  that  the  490  years  should  run  without  any  break.    But  a  closer 


516  KSCHATOLOGY, 

d)  the  great  tribulation.  Compare  Daniel  11:  41;  12:  1; 
Matt.  24:  15—22;  Mark  13:  19,  20;  Rev.  7:  14;  13:  16,  17. 
This  tribulation  is  the  greatest  of  all  tribulations  and  the 
last  great  tribulation.  The  time  of  this  tribulation  is  lim- 
ited and  in  its  severest  form  it  will  very  probably  not  last 

study  of  the  text  and  tacts  proves  that  there  is  a  break.  It  is  stated 
that  after  the  483  years  the  Messiah  shall  be  cut  off,  which  means  His 
death  on  the  cross.  Then  it  is  further  stated  that  the  City  and  the 
temple  shall  be  destroyed  by  the  people  of  the  prince  that  shall  come. 
We  know  that  the  Romans  destroyed  the  City  and  the  temple  in  the 
year  70,  and  the  text  states  that  wars,  etc.,  shall  -continue  unto  the  end. 
Nothing  continuous  with  the  69th  year-week  or  immediately  following 
the  cutting  off"  of  Christ  is  mentioned.  Christ  did  not  make  a  covenant 
for  seven  years  and  after  three  and  a  half  years  cause  the  sacrifice, 
etc.,  to  cease.  Some  of  the  exegetes  claim  that  the  terminus  ad  quern 
was  the  Baptism  of  Christ  and  that  after  three  and  a  half  years  He 
died,  when  sacrifices  ceased  to  have  a  meaning.  But  then  we  have 
nothing  to  mark  the  end  of  the  firm  covenant  of  seven  years.  This 
proves  that  the  483  years  are  not  followed  by  the  seven  years,  but  there 
is  a  break  which  will  continue  until  the  actual  beginning  of  the  seven 
last  years  of  the  Times  of  the  Gentiles  from  which  490  years  were 
apportioned  off  to  relate  what  would  refer  to  the  Jewish  people  and 
the  Holy  City  and  besides  concerns  all  the  children  of  God.  What 
should  be  accomplished  in  these  years  reaches  to  the  end  of  the  present 
age  or  time.  During  this  unreckoned  time  from  the  end  of  the  69th 
year-week  the  Church  is  fulfilling  its  mission,  the  Gospel  is  preached 
for  a  testimony  unto  all  the  nations  and  the  fullness  of  the  Gentiles 
is  gathered  in.    At  the  correct  time  the  70th  year-week  shall  begin. 

Who  will  confirm  the  seven-year  covenant?  Dan.  9:  27  answers  the 
question.  The  prince  that  shall  come  from  the  people  that  destroyed 
the  Holy  City  and  temple.  He  will,  therefore,  come  from  the  territory 
of  the  Roman  empire  and  be  a  Roman.  This  verse  in  Dan.  9  does  not 
say  from  what  part  of  the  Roman  world.  The  last  manifestation  of 
the  Roman  empire  will  be  the  Ten  Kingdom  Confederacy.  When  the 
little  horn  arises  and  conquers  three  of  the  former  horns,  this  little 
horn  does  not  remain  little,  but  soon  develops  into  a  world  emperor  or 
"the  prince  that  shall  come."  In  the  middle  of  the  year-week  this 
world-emperor  or  the  political  Antichrist  will  cancel  all  his  promises 
and  become  the  beast,  as  pictured  in  Daniel  and  Revelation.  During 
the  first  three  and  a  half  years  the  Jews  will  enjoy  religious  liberty. 
During  that  time  the  Jews  will  begin  rebuilding  their  temple  and 
sacrifices  will  be  offered.  But  "in  the  midst  of  the  week  he  shall  cause 
the  sacrifice  and  oblation  to  cease."  In  the  meantime  the  second  beast 
or  the  false  prophet  appears  and  commands  that  an  image  of  the  first 
beast  be  erected  and  worshipped.  This  will  be  the  concrete  expression 
of  the  abomination  of  desolation.  Antiochus  Epiphanes  and  his  abomi- 
nation of  desolation  were  only  types  of  the  political  Antichrist  and 
the  abomination  of  desolation  in  the  last  times.  The  views  of  the  so- 
called  higher  critics  cannot  be  correct,  since  Christ  refers  to  Daniel 
and  places  the  abomination  in  the  future.  The  destruction  of  Jerusa- 
lem and  the  burning  of  the  temple  can  only  be  a  type.  Titus  cannot 
be  considered  as  the  Antichrist,  and  he  tried  to  save  the  temple.  Notice 
also  that  verse  14  in  Matt.  24  describes  the  Gospel  period.  And  then 
follows  the  description  of  the  last  times. 


THE  LAST  TIMES.  517 

more  than  three  and  a  half  years.  However,  this  question 
cannot  be  dogmatically  determined.  There  are  different 
opinions  with  regard  to  prophetic  chronology.  The  Scrip- 
tures have  the  following  to  say  with  regard  to  the  limita- 
tion of  time  in  relation  to  the  great  tribulation :  "And  ex- 
cept those  days  had  been  shortened,  no  flesh  would  have 
been  saved :  but  for  the  elect's  sake  those  days  shall  be 
shortened"  (Matt.  24:  22),  Important  events  take  place 
in  connection  with  the  great  tribulation,  such  as  the  ap- 
pearance of  the  tM'o  witnesses,  their  death  in  Jerusalem 
(Rev.  11:  8),  together  with  their  ascension  into  heaven. 
The  seven  bowls  of  wrath  poured  out  upon  the  adherents 
of  the  beast  belong  to  this  period,  as  well  as  the  judgment 
of  the  great  harlot  or  the  fall  of  Babylon,*  etc.  During  this 
period  the  sixth  and  seven  seals  are  also  broken  and  their 
prophecies  consummated.  Compare  Rev,  11:  3 — 14;  16: 
1—16;  17:  16—18;  18:  2—8;  e)  Har-Magedon  and  the 
great  battle  at  Jerusalem  in  connection  with  the  second 
advent.    In  Rev,  16:  13 — 16  we  read  that  from  the  Dragon, 

*  During  the  first  centuries  of  the  Christian  era  the  City  of  Rome 
was  often  designated  by  the  symbolical  name  Babylon.  Tradition 
cannot  in  every  instance  be  rejected.  Irenaeus  was  a  disciple  of 
Polycarp,  who  was  the  disciple  of  St.  John,  and  he  says  that  the  Great 
Babylon  spoken  of  in  Revelation  meant  Rome.  In  his  Fifth  Book 
against  Heresies,  chapter  2G,  he  calls  Rome  by  the  symbolical  name 
of  Babylon.  He  evidently  had  been  informed  by  Polycarp  what  John 
meant  by  Babylon.  Tertuilian  says,  "Babylon  is  a  figure  of  the  Roman 
City,  mighty,  proud  of  its  sway  and  fiercely  persecuting  the  saints" 
(Lib.  adv.  Jud.).  Jerome  and  Eusebius  held  the  same  opinion.  Roman 
Catholics  like  Bellarmin  and  Bossuet  admitted  that  Rome  was  meant, 
but  not  Papal  Rome.  The  Historical  School  of  Prophecy  holds  that 
Babylon  is  Papal  Rome,  although  some  adherents  of  this  school  think 
that  Constantinople  will  materialize  as  Babylon  of  the  last  days.  Many 
Futurists  hold  that  it  means  Rome  as  revived  Pagan  during  the  two 
Beasts  (Rev.  13),  when  Antichristianity  attains  to  its  climax.  It  is 
interesting  to  note  that  the  coins  and  medals  of  old  Rome  in  many 
cases  bear  the  figure  of  a  woman  sitting  on  seven  hills,  and  she  is 
styled  "The  mistress  of  the  world."  If  Rome  in  the  last  period  before 
the  second  advent  should  become  the  Great  Babylon  as  Capital  of  the 
last  phase  of  Antichristianity,  it  does  not  prevent  other  cities  from 
being  included  in  the  Confederacy  of  evil.  We  must  also  consider 
that  the  symbolical  name  also  implies  that  Babylon  is  a  harlot  and 
mother  of  the  harlots  and  the  abominations  of  earth  which  brings 
into  review  false  religions,  persecutions  of  every  description  and 
counter-persecutions,  but  the  17th  chapter  of  Revelation  pictures  the 
climax  as  it  appears  shortly  before  Christ's  return  to  judgment  and  the 
historical  background. 


518  ESCIIAlX)LOt;Y. 

the  Antichrist  and  the  False  Prophet  (second  beast  or  the 
religious  Antichrist)  went  forth  three  unclean  spirits  or 
demons,  working  signs,  which  go  forth  unto  the  kings  of 
the  whole  earth  to  gather  them  together  unto  the  great  war 
of  the  great  day  of  God,  the  Almighty.  And  they  were 
gathered  together  into  the  place  called  Har-Magedon.  Com- 
pare Rev.  16:  13 — 16.  The  Megiddo  or  Esdraelon  plain  has 
been  one  of  the  great  battlefields  of  the  nations.  When  the 
nations  of  the  world  will  send  armies  to  Palestine,  some 
fighting  against  the  two  Antichrists  and  most  of  them  fight- 
ing on  the  side  of  the  world  emperor  or  political  Antichrist 
and  the  False  Prophet,  we  can  understand  why  the  battle- 
field will  extend  from  Har-Magedon  to  Bozrah,  a  distance 
of  1600  stadia.  Rev.  14 :  20.  Cf .  Isa.  63 :  1—6.  Although 
some  exegetes  have  referred  this  to  Calvary  or  the  atone- 
ment, it  is  evident  that  this  text  is  a  prophecy  which  will 
be  fulfilled  at  the  second  advent.  It  pictures  one  of  the 
awful  scenes  of  "the  great  and  dreadful  day  of  the  Lord." 
Josephus  relates  that  when  the  Romans  destroyed  Jerusalem 
so  great  was  the  bloodshed  that  the  whole  city  ran  w4th 
blood  to  such  a  degree  that  fires  in  furnaces  were  quenched 
by  it.  The  Bible  does  not  overdraw  the  picture  of  the 
bloodshed  on  the  battlefield  from  Har-Magedon  to  Bozrah. 
Compare  also  Isa.  34 :  1—8 ;  Ps.  2 :  1—5 ;  Ezek.  38 :  14—23  ; 
Joel  2:  1,  2;  3:  1,  2;  Zech.  12:  2,  3;  "And  it  shall  come  to 
pass  in  that  day,  that  I  will  seek  to  destroy  all  the  nations 
that  come  against  Jerusalem"  (v.  9)  ;  read  carefully  Zech. 
14 :  1 — 5,  which  describes  the  last  battle  at  Jerusalem  in 
connection  with  the  second  coming ;  cf ,  Joel  3 :  12.  Read 
carefully  Matt.  24:  16—31;  Mark  13:  14—27,  which  refer 
to  the  second  advent  period;  Luke  21:  20 — 24  refers  to  the 
destruction  of  Jerusalem  in  the  year  70;  read  also  Rev.  19: 
11 — 21.  As  all  nations  more  or  less  will  be  represented  by 
armies,  it  is  interesting  to  study  Ezekiel,  38th  and  39th 
chapters.  Some  exegetes  hold  the  view  that  Gog  is  identical 
with  "the  little  horn"  or  the  political  Antichrist,  and  others 
that  he  is  the  king  of  the  North,  mentioned  in  Daniel,  but 
if  neither  view  is  correct,  it  is  clear  that  he  is  an  ally  with 


THE   LAST   TIMES.  519 

the  political  Antichrist  and  the  False  Prophet  at  the  battles 
on  the  old  Esdraelon  plain  and  at  Jerusalem,  as  it  is  stated 
that  in  the  latter  days  he  shall  come  against  Israel  (Ezek. 
38:  16).  He  is  called  Gog  of  Magog,  prince  of  Rosh  (per- 
haps Russia),  Meshech  (Moscow)  and  Tubal  (perhaps  To- 
bolsk). Gomer  in  the  sixth  verse  covered  Germany  and 
Austria  of  our  day.  Persia,  Gush  and  Put  are  also  men- 
tioned. According  to  Rev.  16:  12,  "the  kings  of  the  sun- 
rising"  shall  also  take  part,  i.e.,  the  rulers  east  of  Euphrates ; 
f )  a  great  earthquake  and  terrifying  signs  in  the  heavens. 
Many  earthquakes  will  have  preceded,  and  one  is  especially 
mentioned  in  Rev.  11:  13,  but  this  earthquake  will  be  the 
greatest.  "And  there  was  a  great  earthquake,  such  as  was 
not  since  there  were  men  upon  the  earth,  so  great  an  earth- 
quake, so  mighty.  And  the  great  city  was  divided  into 
three  parts,  and  the  cities  of  the  nations  fell"  (Rev.  16: 
18,  19)  ;  "And  there  was  a  great  earthquake;  and  the  sun 
became  black  as  sackcloth  of  hair,  and  the  whole  moon  be- 
came as  blood ;  and  the  stars  of  heaven  fell  unto  the  earth" 
(Rev.  6:  12,  13).  These  signs  occur  not  long  after,  and 
very  probably  immediately  after,  the  great  tribulation  and 
at  the  time  of  our  Lord's  coming  on  the  clouds  of  heaven 
with  power  and  great  glory.  The  following  Scripture  pas- 
sages prove  that  these  signs  are  the  last  and  decisive  signs 
before  the  second  advent  period  of  Christ:  "But  imme- 
diately after  the  tribulation  of  those  days  the  sun  shall  be 
darkened,  and  the  moon  shall  not  give  her  light,  and  the 
stars  shall  fall  from  heaven,  and  the  powers  of  the  heavens 
shall  be  shaken :  and  then  shall  appear  the  sign  of  the  Son 
of  man  in  heaven :  and  then  shall  all  the  tribes  of  the  earth 
mourn,  and  they  shall  see  the  Son  of  man  coming  on  the 
clouds  of  heaven  with  power  and  great  glory"  (Matt.  24: 
29,  30)  ;  "But  in  those  days,  after  that  tribulation,  the  sun 
shall  be  darkened,  and  the  moon  shall  not  give  her  light, 
and  the  stars  shall  be  falling  from  heaven,  and  the  powers 
that  are  in  the  heavens  shall  be  shaken"  (Mark  13 :  24,  25) . 
Compare  Luke  21 :  25—28 ;  Rev.  10 :  5—7. 

Many  earnest  Christians,  in  studying  the  signs  of  the 


520  KSCIIATOI.OGY. 

times  and  longing  for  the  return  of  the  Lord,  inquire  if 
there  are  no  means  of  calculation  as  to  the  period  in  which 
we  live.  The  New  Testament  does  not  contain  such  a  clear 
prophecy  in  regard  to  the  time  of  the  second  advent  as  the 
seventy  weeks  in  Dan.  9  point  out  the  time  of  the  first 
advent.  Although  only  God  knows  the  exact  time,  year 
and  date  of  the  return  of  Christ,  there  are  prophecies  de- 
scribing clear  signs  from  which  we  may  conclude  in  what 
period  we  live.  Among  such  prophecies  in  the  Old  Testa- 
ment we  call  attention  to  Dan.  2,  which  has  been  called  the 
Almanac  of  prophecy.  Nebuchadnezzar  had  a  dream  vision 
which  Daniel  revealed  and  interpreted  to  the  king.  Daniel 
regarded  the  dream  as  a  communication  from  God.  The 
great  image  w^hich  the  king  had  seen  in  the  dream  was  a 
revelation  concerning  the  destiny  of  several  world  dominions 
in  their  historical  development  to  the  end  of  the  present 
world  and  a  description  of  the  kingdom  of  God  which  will 
supercede  the  great  world  empires.  In  studying  the  mean- 
ing of  the  prophecy,  great  emperors  and  empires  pass  in 
review,  from  Nebuchadnezzar  and  Babylon  to  the  last  form 
of  the  Roman  empire  during  the  ten  kings'  confederacy. 
We  see  in  this  review  the  kingdoms  of  gold,  silver,  brass, 
iron  and  the  mixed  kingdom  of  clay  and  iron.  Then  follows 
the  eternal  kingdom,  presented  as  a  stone  kingdom  for  rea- 
sons that  are  plain.  It  is  clear  to  all  Bible  students  that 
the  great  four,  Babylon,  Medo-Persia,  the  Greek-Mace- 
donian and  the  old  Roman  empires,  have  passed.  The  iron 
legs  of  the  figure  have  stretched*  through  many  centuries, 
and  everything  proves  that  w^e  have  reached  the  feet,  yea, 
the  middle  of  the  feet,  and  that  the  next  formation  is  the 
confederacy  of  the  ten  kingdoms,  when  according  to  the 
figure  we  have  come  to  the  toes.  When  we  consider  the 
league  of  nations  and  the  association  of  nations,  it  is  evi- 
dent that  the  confederacy  of  the  ten  kingdoms  or  the  revival 
of  the  Roman  empire  will  follow  at  the  mature  time  in  the 
future.  If  we  consider  the  present  state  of  society  and 
especially  the  political  upheaval  in  Europe  and  in  the  near 
East,  it  is  also  clear  that  we  have  entered  the  period  "of 


TTIE   RKCONn   CO^riNG   OF  OIIiaST.  521 

miry  clay  and  iron"  or  the  last  period  before  the  judgment 
era.  Only  God  knows  the  length  of  the  period.  Consider 
also  that  we,  according  to  the  seven  church  periods,  have 
come  to  the  Laodicean  period  of  lukewarmness,  disorder 
and  worldly  domineering.  Whether  we  follow  the  Historical 
School  of  prophetical  interpretation  or  the  Futurist  method, 
we  know  what  periods  are  passed  and  where  we  are,  accord- 
ing to  Daniel  and  other  prophecies  in  their  clear  statements. 
If  the  day  of  the  Lord  will  come  to  unbehevers  "as  a  thief 
in  the  night,"  it  is  also  true  what  Paul  says  in  1  Thess.  5:4: 
''But  ye,  brethren,  are  not  in  darkness,  that  that  day  should 
overtake  you  as  a  thief." 

Gerhard  presents  four  reasons  why  Christ  foretold  the 
signs  of  the  end  of  the  world:*  1)  as  a  proof  of  love  (ut 
essent  sui  erga  nos  amoris  demonstrativa)  ;  2)  as  a  means 
of  expelling  security  (securitas  expulsiva)  ;  3)  as  an  anti- 
dote against  exaggerated  anxiety  or  curiosity  {-n-eptepyM^ 
alexipharmaca).  On  the  one  hand  he  warns  men  against 
false  security  and  on  the  other  against  immoderate  curi- 
osity. The  Lord  has  not  revealed  the  day  nor  the  hour  of 
His  coming.  It  is  certain  that  we  are  to  die,  but  we  do  not 
know  the  day  of  our  death.  In  the  same  manner  it  is  cer- 
tain that  the  day  of  the  Lord  will  come,  but  we  cannot  tell 
when.  He  refers  us  to  Matt.  24 :  44 ;  Luke  12 :  46 ;  1  Thess. 
5:3;  4)  as  a  remedy  for  pusillanimity  {ixiKpo\{/vxLa<:  remedia). 
Christ  says :  "But  when  these  things  begin  to  come  to  pass, 
look  up,  and  lift  up  your  heads ;  because  your  redemption 
draweth  nigh"  (Luke  21:  28). 

§42.     THE  SECOND  COMING  OF  CHRIST. 

During  the  Old  Testament  dispensation  the  faithful 
looked  with  longing  expectancy  for  the  time  when  the  sun 
of  righteousness  would  arise  with  healing  in  his  wings  and 
spread  the  light  of  heaven  in  the  world  of  darkness.  That 
time  came,  and  the  star  of  Bethlehem  appeared  glimmering 
in  the  heavens,  and  the  Light  of  the  world  shone  upon  the 

*  Loci  Theologici,  Tomus  Nonus,  Cap.  VII,  XIX,  274,  etc. 


522  KsrnAi'oi.oGY. 

earth.  This  light  has  not  been  extinguished,  although  the 
Lord  is  not  now  visibly  present  upon  the  earth.  And  yet 
while  the  New  Testament  possesses  the  light  of  day  in  com- 
parison with  the  Old  Testament,  still  the  believers  expect 
a  still  more  glorious  day  when  the  Lord  shall  come  again. 
In  this  respect  the  believers  of  the  New  Testament  resemble 
the  faithful  Israelites  of  the  Old  Testament,  inasmuch  as 
both  look  for  the  Christ.  In  His  first  advent  the  Lord  came 
in  the  fullness  of  time,  and  when  the  predetermined  time 
of  His  second  advent  shall  arrive.  He  will  come  again.  The 
first  advent  throws  light  upon  the  second  advent,  and  the 
latter  completes  the  former.  There  are  many  prophecies 
in  the  Old  Testament  which  have  reference  to  the  second 
advent,  although  the  prophets  did  not  seem  to  understand 
that  the  Messiah  would  appear  twice  upon  the  earth.  Not 
even  John  the  Baptist  had  a  clear  conception  of  the  two 
advents.  His  twofold  prophetic  testimony  concerning 
Christ  resembled  the  prophecies  of  the  predecessors,  and 
he  was  himself  astonished  that  the  work  of  the  Messiah 
was  that  of  a  Saviour  alone  and  not  also  that  of  a  Judge. 
But  Christ  came  the  first  time  as  a  Saviour,  and  the  second 
time  He  shall  come  again  as  a  Judge  and  Redeemer.  The 
Scriptures  set  forth  much  in  connection  with  the  advent  of 
our  Lord,  but  the  full  import  and  significance  of  it  will  be 
made  perfectly  clear  only  by  the  coming  of  the  great  day 
itself.  And  yet,  although  the  cloak  of  mystery  conceals 
much  and  renders  many  problems  in  eschatology  difficult 
of  solution,  still  the  doctrine  of  the  second  coming  of  Christ 
is  very  precious  and  of  great  worth,  because  upon  it  rests 
the  hope  of  the  Church  that  the  kingdom  of  God  shall  enter 
upon  its  state  of  perfection  in  the  new  heaven  and  upon  the 
new  earth. 

1.    Definition  of  the  Second  Advent. 

The  Second  Advent  of  Christ  is  the  act  of  Christ,  the 
God-man,  when  in  accordance  icith  His  promise  He  shall 
come  on  the  clouds  of  heaven  with  power  and  great  glory 
for  the  purpose  of  redeeming  His  own,  completing  His  work 


THE   SECOND   COMING    OF   CHKIST.  523 

and  judgifig  the  world  according  to  His  eternal  purpose,  to 
the  honor  of  God  and  the  joy  of  the  blessed  in  the  eternal 
kingdom.  The  first  advent  of  Christ  was  characterized  by 
the  work  of  atonement  and  in  principle  the  redemption,  the 
second  advent  will  be  characterized  by  the  practical  works 
of  redemption  when  the  Lord  shall  also  sit  in  righteous 
judgment  upon  all  men.  He  is  the  Lion  that  is  of  the  tribe 
of  Judah,  the  Lamb  that  hath  overcome  (Rev.  5),  He  is  the 
Redeemer  who  is  worthy  to  open  the  book,  and  to  loose 
the  seals  thereof.  And  when  the  seals  have  been  broken, 
then  shall  great  voices  sound  forth  in  the  seventh  trumpet 
in  heaven  and  say,  'The  kingdom  of  the  world  is  become  the 
kingdom  of  our  Lord,  and  of  his  Christ ;  and  he  shall  reign 
for  ever  and  ever"  (Rev.  11:  15).  Compare  Rev.  19:  6, 
11—16. 

2.    The  Attributes  of  the  Second  Advent. 

Adventus  Christi,  which  includes  both  Tra/aono-tu  and  i-n-icfidveia 
rj  (XTroKaAi^i/'ts,  is  more  precisely  defined  by  the  following  at- 
tributes: 1)  personalis,  or  personal,  which  term  is  used 
against  such  as  say  that  the  advent  takes  place  when  men 
die  or  that  it  takes  place  spiritually  in  the  dispensations  of 
Providence;  2)  certiis,  or  certain.  In  the  Old  Testament 
there  are  many  prophecies  concerning  the  advent  that  are 
expressed  in  such  language  that  only  the  second  advent 
can  be  referred  to.  In  the  New  Testament  there  are  many 
clear  and  precise  promises  and  prophecies  in  relation  to 
the  second  advent  of  Christ.  About  one-thirtieth  of  the 
content  of  the  New  Testament  relates  to  eschatology.  There 
is  sure  ground  for  the  doctrine  of  the  personal  advent  of 
Christ  in  the  Word  of  God;  3)  visihilis,  or  visible.  We 
direct  attention  to  the  following  Scripture  passages:  "For 
as  the  lightning  cometh  forth  from  the  east,  and  is  seen 
even  unto  the  west ;  so  shall  be  the  coming  of  the  Son  of 
man"  (Matt.  24:  27)  ;  "And  they  shall  see  the  Son  of  man 
coming  on  the  clouds  of  heaven"  (Matt.  24:  30)  ;  "Hence- 
forth ye  shall  see  the  Son  of  man  sitting  at  the  right  hand 
of  Power,  and  coming  on  the  clouds  of  heaven"   (Matt.  26: 


524  KSCIIA'TOI-OGY. 

64).  These  last  words  were  uttered  under  oath  before  the 
high  priest.  Compare  Rev.  1:  7.  The  Greek  expressions, 
such  as  cVtc^ama,  indicate  that  the  advent  will  be  visible. 
This  is  not  disproved  even  if  it  can  be  proved  that  the 
epiphany  will  be  preceded  by  a  irapovcrU  when  the  marriage 
supper  of  the  Lamb  (Rev.  19:  7 — 9)  is  to  be  celebrated,  as 
some  commentators  assert.  The  Scriptures  are  very  clear 
in  making  the  second  coming  of  our  Lord  an  adventus  visi- 
bilis;  4)  gloriosu^^,  or  glorious.  In  the  nature  of  the  case 
the  second  coming  will  be  glorious  and  majestic.  Compare 
Luke  21 :  27;  Matt.  25 :  31 ;  5)  terrihilis,  or  terrible,  for  the 
unbelievers.  Compare  Rev.  6:  15 — 17;  6)  exoptatus,  or 
greatly  longed  for,  by  the  believers.  The  epistles  of  Paul 
speak  more  frequently  of  the  coming  of  Christ  than  of 
death  and  of  the  blessed  intermediate  state.  The  advent 
of  Christ  is  the  hope  of  the  saints.  Even  the  blessed  dead 
long  for  it  (Rev.  6:  10,  11)  ;  7)  beatificus.  The  faithful 
who  have  passed  away  are  indeed  blessed  in  the  interme- 
diate state,  but  their  salvation  will  be  completed  when 
Christ  returns  again.  To  those  that  are  alive  at  the  second 
coming  of  the  Lord  and  who  are  members  of  the  true 
Church  the  second  advent  will  be  blessed  (beatificus)  in 
a  double  sense,  inasmuch  as  they  escape  the  experience  of 
death  and  instead  will  be  changed  and  caught  up  in  the 
clouds  to  meet  the  Lord  in  the  air.  Compare  2  Cor.  5:2; 
1  Thess.  4:  17. 

At  the  ascension  of  Christ  into  heaven  not  all  prophecies 
relating  to  the  advent  were  fulfilled,  which  proves  that  He 
will  come  again,  when  the  remaining  prophecies  will  be  ful- 
filled. Although  the  prophecies  in  regard  to  the  personal 
second  coming  are  plain,  there  are  many  skeptics  who  either 
•doubt  the  second  advent  or  claim  that  the  event  took  place 
at  the  destruction  of  Jerusalem,  and  there  are  others  who 
say  that  Christ  comes  to  each  believer  at  death.  The  last 
view  does  not  explain  the  personal  return  of  Christ, 
when  He  will  be  seen  by  all  living  and  resurrected  in  the 
judgment  period.  The  second  coming  will  be  just  as  real, 
personal  and  visible  as  the  first  advent.    Some  cannot  com- 


THE    SECOND   COMING    OF   CHRIST.  525 

prehend  the  seeing  of  Christ  with  mortal  eyes.  They  for- 
get that  Christ  was  seen  by  the  disciples  in  His  resurrection 
body.  Christ  did  not  receive  another  body  at  the  ascension. 
And  He  will  return  in  the  same  body  as  He  ascended.  The 
appearance  in  glory  is  not  another  body,  but  only  another 
condition  of  the  same  body.  Even  in  the  state  of  humilia- 
tion His  body  was  glorified  at  the  transfiguration. 

In  order  to  assist  in  removing  some  misunderstandings, 
where  there  are  seeming  contradictions,  we  call  attention 
to  some  passages  that  have  troubled  Bible  readers.  One  of 
these  passages  is  Matt.  16:  27,  28.  In  regard  to  the  state- 
ment in  verse  27,  we  will  find  by  comparing  the  parallels 
in  Mark  and  Luke  that  there  is  no  attempt  to  give  a  chrono- 
logical order  of  events.  Verse  27  is  simply  an  argument 
used  by  Matthew.  He  wrote  his  gospel  primarily  to  con- 
vince the  Jews  that  Jesus  was  the  Christ.  His  object  was 
not  to  present  Eschatology  in  perfect  chronology.  The  key 
to  a  correct  understanding  lies  often  in  considering  if  the 
parallels  are  true  as  to  a  given  passage  or  false  in  that 
respect.  The  kingdom  of  God  has  two  phases,  just  as  the 
first  and  second  advent  are  two  phases  of  the  advent.  The 
Old  Testament  speaks  of  the  advent,  but  fulfillment  proves 
that  the  advent  is  divided  in  two.  When  Christ  stood 
before  Pilate  (John  18:  36,  37)  He  spoke  of  the  kingdom 
in  its  first  phase  and,  therefore,  the  kingdom  of  another 
world  and  a  kingdom  of  truth.  When  Jesus  stood  before 
the  high  priest.  He  swore  that  He  was  the  Christ,  the  Son 
of  God,  and  said :  "Henceforth  ye  shall  see  the  Son  of  man 
sitting  at  the  right  hand  of  Power,  and  coming  on  the  clouds 
of  heaven^"  By  this  saying  He  referred  to  His  glorious 
visible  return  and  the  kingdom  in  its  second  phase.  This 
declaration  of  Christ  on  oath  was  not  fulfilled  at  the  de- 
struction of  Jerusalem,  A.  D.  70,  and  it  has  not  been  ful- 
filled yet.  Christ  has  not  returned.  The  second  coming 
belongs  to  the  future.  The  kingdom,  therefore,  having  two 
phases,  does  Matt.  16:  28  refer  to  the  first  phase  or  to  the 
last  ?  Plainly  to  the  first  phase,  if  we  follow  the  law  of  true 
parallels.     Otherwise  Christ  had  returned  during  the  first 


526  ESCHA1X)L0GY. 

century,  because  some  of  those  listening  should  not  taste  of 
death,  "till  they  see  the  Son  of  man  coming  in  his  kingdom." 
This  problem  will  be  solved  by  the  true  parallels  and  by 
necessary  common  sense  in  interpretation.  Compare  Mark 
9 :  1  as  a  parallel :  "Till  they  see  the  kingdom  of  God  come 
with  power."  Some  of  those  disciples  who  were  listening 
saw  the  kingdom  of  God  in  power  at  the  transfiguration 
of  Cht"ist,  at  the  entrance  of  Christ  into  Jerusalem  on  Palm 
Sunday,  at  His  resurrection  and  ascension,  at  Pentecost  and 
in  the  victories  of  Christianity  in  the  Roman  empire.  If 
the  second  advent  took  place  at  the  destruction  of  Jerusa- 
lem, a  great  part  of  the  New  Testament  becomes  meaning- 
less. Let  us  also  notice  the  meaning  of  Matt.  24 :  34 :  "This 
generation  shall  not  pass  away,  till  all  these  things  be  ac- 
complished." It  is  claimed  that  generation  only  means  an 
ordinary  lifetime,  and,  therefore,  everything  must  have 
been  fulfilled  at  the  destruction  of  Jerusalem.  Prominent 
scholars  claim  that  the  Greek  word  for  generation  also 
means  race  or  nation.  Christ  may,  therefore,  have  used 
the  word  in  the  sense  "race  or  nation"  and  probably  did. 
No  one  can  contradict  the  fact  that  the  Jews  exist  as  an 
exclusive  race  and  without  a  national  home  keep  intact 
as  a  nation.  Even  if  we  should  forego  the  legitimate  trans- 
lation and  meaning  of  the  word,  we  must  carefully  note  the 
time  connection  of  the  passage.  It  is  evident  that  Christ 
spoke  as  by  anticipation  describing  the  time  of  fulfillment. 
He  transplants  the  hearers  to  the  time  when  these  things 
take  place  and  means  that  the  generation  then  living  would 
not  pass  away  before  all  was  fulfilled.  Some  have  trans- 
lated :  "That  generation  (then  living)  will  not  pass  away," 
In  either  case  there  will  be  no  contradiction.  —  Matt.  10 : 
23  will  be  clear  by  studying  the  context  and  by  following 
the  same  principle  as  in  the  interpretation  of  Matt,  16:  28, 
—  Rev.  1 :  1  and  3  and  also  22 :  20  contain  prophetic  expres- 
sions which  do  not  necessarily  imply  the  human  way  of 
counting.  Compare  2  Peter  3:  8  and  context.  Note 
"speedily"  in  Luke  18:  7,  8.  There  would  be  no  conflict 
with  the  prophetical  formula  in  Rev.  1  and  22,  if  we  would 


THE   SECOND  COIVIINC.   OK   CHRIST.  527 

interpret  the  phrases  to  mean  that  the  events  would 
"shortly  come  to  pass"  or  would  soon  begin  to  be  fulfilled, 
one  after  the  other,  although  the  content,  humanly  speaking, 
would  require  a  long  time  to  develop.  If  we  consider  the 
seven  churches  in  their  prophetic  meaning,  the  statements 
in  the  Revelation  began  to  materialize  quickly  in  the  his- 
torical development,  although  the  Book  of  Revelation  prin- 
cipally pictures  the  period  of  the  second  advent  and  the 
climax  of  the  historical  development. 

In  regard  to  the  certainty  of  the  future  second  advent 
the  promises  are  many  and  clear.  While  on  earth,  Christ 
gave  many  and  plain  promises  as  to  His  visible  and  glorious 
return.  Besides,  Christ  declared  on  oath,  as  already  men- 
tioned, that  He  shall  return  on  the  clouds  of  heaven.  When 
He  had  just  ascended  visibly,  the  two  heavenly  messengers 
said:  "Ye  men  of  Galilee,  why  stand  ye  looking  into  heaven? 
this  Jesus,  who  was  received  from  you  into  heaven,  shall 
so  come  in  like  manner  as  ye  beheld  him  going  into  heaven." 
This  passage,  Acts  1 :  11,  cannot  be  twisted  to  disprove  the 
visible  return  of  Christ  by  claiming  that  the  rendering  "in 
like  manner"  is  a  wrong  translation.  The  deniers  of  a 
future  visible  return  contend  that  the  Greek  words  should 
be  translated  as  in  Matt.  23 :  37 ;  Acts  7 :  28 ;  2  Tim.  3 :  8. 
If  "in  like  manner"  is  excluded  and  the  translation  would 
be  rendered  "shall  come  as,"  the  text  would  support  the 
view  that  Christ  shall  return  visibly  and  personally  as  He 
ascended.  Compare  the  Greek  original.  The  best  scholars 
have  translated  "shall  so  come  in  like  manner  as."  The 
analogy  of  faith  and  true  parallels  of  ideas  prove  plainly 
that  Christ  shall  return  visibly  and  as  He  ascended.  We 
might  quote  Zech.  14 :  4,  but  it  is  not  necessary.  The  pas- 
sage is  interesting  as  describing  locality  in  a  detailed  man- 
ner, proving  that  it  is  not  a  figurative  passage.  Another 
clear  passage  is  Acts  3:  29,  21:  "That  he  may  send  the 
Christ  who  hath  been  appointed  for  you,  even  Jesus,  whom 
the  heavens  must  receive  until  the  times  of  restoration  of 
all  things."  The  times  of  refreshing  and  restoration  have 
not  yet  come.    The  whole  statement  proves  that  Jesus  Christ 


528  KSCIIATOLOGY. 

shall  return  personally.  Study  also  the  following  passages : 
1  Thess.  1 :  10  and  3 :  13,  ''to  wait  for  his  Son  from  heaven" 
and  "at  the  coming  of  our  Lord  Jesus  with  all  his  saints" ; 
1  Cor.  15:  51,  52  (the  revealed  mystery)  ;  1  Thess.  4:  13 
— 17;  2  Thess.  2,  relating  how  "the  lawless  one"  shall  be 
slain  by  the  Lord  Jesus  at  His  manifestation ;  1  Thess.  4 : 
16:  "The  Lord  himself  shall  descend  from  heaven,  with  a 
shout,  with  the  voice  of  an  archangel,  and  with  the  trump 
of  God:  and  the  dead  in  Christ  shall  rise  first."  This  has 
not  yet  occurred.  All  these  passages  and  many  more  prove 
the  certainty  of  Christ's  personal  and  visible  return.  If 
Christ  does  not  return,  the  book  of  Revelation  would  be  a 
New  Testament  apocrypha  and  not  "an  apocalypsis."  But 
as  the  book  of  Revelation  is  the  Apocalypse  of  Jesus  Christ 
at  His  second  advent,  this  whole  book  becomes  the  climax 
in  the  arguments  for  the  visible,  personal  and  glorious 
return  of  Christ  as  Redeemer. 

3.  The  Effects  of  the  Second  Advent. 
In  connection  with  the  second  advent  of  Christ  there  will 
take  place  the  resurrection,  first  of  the  dead  in  Christ  who 
shall  rise  first,  accompanied  by  the  transformation  of  the 
believers  in  Christ  who  are  then  alive;  the  meeting  of  the 
true  Church  with  the  Lord  in  the  air ;  the  marriage  of  the 
Lamb;  the  various  acts  of  judgment;  the  end  of  the  present 
world  aeon  and  the  beginning  of  the  eternal  kingdom.  —  We 
quote  the  following  passages  to  prove  that  the  transforma- 
tion of  the  believers  takes  place  in  connection  with  the 
resurrection  of  the  dead:  "Behold,  I  tell  you  a  mystery: 
We  all  shall  not  sleep,  but  we  shall  all  be  changed,  in  a 
moment,  in  the  twinkling  of  an  eye,  at  the  last  trump :  for 
the  trumpet  shall  sound,  and  the  dead  shall  be  raised  incor- 
ruptible, and  we  shall  be  changed"  (1  Cor.  15:  51,  52). 
Compare  1  Thess.  4:  15;  also  2  Cor.  5:  2 — 4,  where 
the  change  is  spoken  of  as  being  "clothed  upon."  This 
transformation  or  being  "clothed  upon"  is  called  iirev^vaaaOai 
(2  Cor.  5 :  2 — 4) ,  to  die  or  be  "unclothed"  is  called  eVSi'o-ao-oai, 
while  to  arise  or  "being  clothed"  is  called  iv^vcraaSiu .     The 


THE    SECOND   COMING    OF    CHRIST.  529 

Scripture  passages  which  especially  set  forth  the  meeting 
of  the  true  Church  with  the  Lord  in  the  air  are  the  follow- 
ing: Luke  17:  34—37;  1  Thess.  4:  17;  Rev.  12:  5.  With 
regard  to  the  marriage  of  the  Lamb,  read  Matt.  25  :  1 — 13 ; 
2  Cor.  11:  2;  Eph.  5:  32,  and  with  regard  to  the  marriage 
supper,  read  Rev.  19 :  7 — 9.  Among  the  acts  of  judgment 
connected  with  the  second  coming  of  the  Lord  may  be  men- 
tioned the  war  of  the  great  day  of  God,  the  Almighty  (Rev. 
16:  14).  According  to  Rev.  16:  16  it  would  seem  as  if  this 
struggle  were  to  be  fought  in  the  plain  of  Esdraelon,  the 
battlefield  of  Jewish  history,  or  Har-Magedon.  Compare 
also  Zech.  14 :  1 — 7,  12 — 15,  which  proves  that  the  struggle 
is  to  take  place  likewise  at  Jerusalem.  During  this  struggle 
the  judgment  of  the  two  beasts  takes  place.  Compare  Rev. 
19 :  19 — 21.  With  regard  to  this  struggle  the  Lord  has 
issued  warning  words  to  those  that  live  in  Judea.  Compare 
Matt.  24:  15 — 28.  While  these  warning  words,  in  accord- 
ance with  Luke  20 :  20 — 24,  may  have  had  reference  to 
the  destruction  of  Jerusalem  under  Titus,  still  the  judg- 
ment on  Jerusalem  was  merely  the  type  of  a  still  greater 
destruction  and  tribulation.  In  accordance  with  Matthew 
and  Mark  these  warnings  would  seem  to  have  reference  to 
the  time  of  our  Lord's  second  coming.  Compare  §41,  3,  e. 
With  regard  to  the  judgment  in  the  specific  sense  together 
with  the  end  of  the  world,  note  the  special  paragraphs 
which  treat  of  them. 

The  most  difficult  problem  which  eschatology  is  called 
upon  to  solve  is  the  question  as  to  whether  the  eternal  king- 
dom is  to  be  preceded  by  or  begun  with  a  preparatory  aeon 
or  period,  which  is  called  the  millennium.  There  are  some 
who  have  believed  that  the  millennium  would  precede  the 
second  coming  of  Christ,  and  this  view  is  called  Postmillen- 
nialism,  while  others  state  that  the  millennium  will  begin 
immediately  after  the  coming  of  the  Lord,  and  this  view  is 
called  Premillennialism.  The  adherents  of  gross  Chiliasm 
conceive  of  the  millennium  as  being  an  earthly  carnal  king- 
dom of  glory  and  happiness,  as  though  the  kingdom  of  God 
were  of  this  world.    The  Augsburg  Confession  in  its  XVII. 

Dogmatics.     18. 


530  r;.s('ii.\Toi.otiV. 

Article  has  the  following  to  say  about  this  theory  and  the 
Chiliastic  view  of  the  Anabaptists:*  "Damnant  et  alios, 
qui  nunc  spargunt  iudaicas  opiniones,  quod  ante  resurrec- 
tionem  mortuorum  pii  regnum  mundi  occupaturi  sint, 
ubique  oppressis  impiis."  Translated,  this  reads:  "They 
also  condemn  others  who  spread  Jewish  opinions,  that  be- 
fore the  resurrection  of  the  dead  the  godly  shall  occupy 
the  kingdom  of  the  world,  the  wicked  being  everywhere 
suppressed."  Melanchthon  declares  in  Variata  that  the 
Anabaptists  are  referred  to.  The  Confessions  have  not 
otherwise  given  expression  to  any  views  on  the  millennium. 
But  this  expression  of  the  Augsburg  Confession  makes 
clear  the  position  of  the  Lutheran  Church  in  rejecting  gross 
Chiliasm  together  with  the  view  that  the  millennium  would 
take  place  before  the  resurrection  of  the  dead  and  therefore 
before  the  second  advent  of  Christ.  Although  Lutheran 
theologians  have  rejected  the  theory  of  the  millennium  in 
the  sense  referred  to  in  the  Confession,  still  they  have  en- 
deavored to  explain  the  significance  of  the  so-called  mil- 
lennium. It  is  clearly  evident  that  Rev.  20  cannot  be  wholly 
ignored.  Some  of  the  Lutheran  Dogmaticians,  such  as 
Gerhard,  have  placed  the  millennium  in  the  past.  Others 
interpret  the  thousand  years  and  in  general  the  contents  of 
Rev.  20  in  a  figurative  and  symbolic  sense.  Among  the 
recent  theologians  opinions  are  divided.  And  yet  even 
among  confessional  theologians  there  are  somg  who  inter- 
pret Rev.  20  literally.  Among  such  theologians  may  be 
mentioned  Frank.**  If  the  millennium  is  not  to  be  conceived 
of  as  an  expression  of  the  world  conquest  of  the  Christian 
Church  during  the  New  Testament  period,  and  if  a  closer 
study  of  Rev.  20  leads  to  the  conclusion  that  its  contents 
must  in  the  main  be  literally  interpreted,  the  theory  of 
Premillennialism  is  thereby  strengthened.  While  Lutheran 
Dogmatics  does  not  express  decisive  views  on  this  question 
and  while  the  Confessions  have  said  nothing  more  than 
what  is  expressed  in  the  quotation  from  the  Augsburg  Con- 

*  Miiller,  Symb.  Biicher,  p.  63. 
**  System  der  Christliche  Wahrheit,  II,  471. 


THE   SECOND   COMING   OF  CHRIST.  531 

fession,  still  the  following  reasons  may  be  presented  as 
arguments  against  the  view  that  the  millennium  will  pre- 
cede the  second  coming  of  Christ:  1)  Neither  Christ  nor 
His  Apostles  have  spoken  of  a  millennium  as  preceding  the 
second  advent  of  Christ.  2)  If  the  Apostles  thought  of  a 
millennium,  it  was  in  accordance  with  premillenarian  views, 
inasmuch  as  their  hope  was  connected  with  the  return  of 
Christ.  Their  description  of  the  last  times  is  not  post- 
millennial.  3)  The  general  presentation  in  the  New  Testa- 
ment concerning  the  position  of  the  Church  during  the 
present  dispensation  does  not  accord  with  the  view  that 
the  millennium  will  occur  before  the  second  advent  of  our 
Lord.  4)  The  reiterated  warnings  of  our  Lord  to  watch 
and  wait  for  His  coming  prove  conclusively  that  the  millen- 
nium would  not  precede  His  coming,  since  in  that  case  there 
would  have  been  no  need  of  watching,  inasmuch  as  the  dis- 
ciples would  know  that  at  least  a  thousand  years  must  pass 
by  before  the  Lord  would  come  again.  5)  The  coming  of 
our  Lord  is  constantly  set  forth  as  the  blessed  hope  of  the 
Christians.  6)  The  doctrine  of  Antichrist  and  the  great 
tribulation  before  the  coming  of  the  Lord  militates  against 
the  doctrine  of  a  preceding  millennium.  7)  The  only  chap- 
ter in  the  Bible  which  expressly  presents  the  millennium 
places  this  period  after  events  which  specifically  are  con- 
nected with  the  second  coming  of  the  Lord.  8)  The  general 
view  in  the  Apostolic  Church  was  premillenarian.  //,  there- 
fore, the  millennium  is  to  follow  the  second  coming  of  our 
Lord,  in  accordance  with  a  literal  interpretation  of  Rev.  20, 
it  is  also  evident  that  Rev.  19:  11 — 16  together  with  other 
passages  in  the  same  book  refer  to  Christ's  personal  and 
visible  advent.  2  Thess.  2:  8  (compare  2  Thess.  1:  5 — 10) 
presents  the  epiphany  of  the  Lord  as  preceding  the  judg- 
ment of  the  "lawless  one."  Rev.  19 :  20  speaks  of  the  judg- 
ment of  the  two  beasts.  After  this  follow  the  occurrences 
set  forth  in  Rev.  20,  although  the  resurrection  spoken  of  in 
the  sixth  verse  must  be  conceived  of  as  taking  place  at  the 
time  of  the  second  advent.  In  case  the  millennium  is 
thought  of  as  marking  the  transition  to  the  eternal  king- 


532  ESCHATOIX)GY. 

dom,  then  the  period  designated  by  the  thousand  years  must 
imply  a  new  order  of  things  in  the  gracious  dispensation  of 
the  Lord.  While  it  is  not  possible  for  us  to  pass  dogmat- 
ically on  the  question  of  the  millennium,  still  we  do  not 
believe  that  in  case  of  its  realization  the  world  would  there- 
by become  a  paradise,  although  it  is  certain  that  such  a 
period  would  become  comparatively  better  and  happier  than 
all  preceding  periods.  And  yet  it  must  be  remembered  that 
the  kingdom  of  God  will  still  be  in  the  world,  although  not 
of  the  world.  Even  during  a  period  of  that  sort  the  be- 
lievers will  not  conquer  the  whole  world,  since  the  wicked 
are  still  in  the  world  and  toward  the  close  of  the  period, 
we  are  told,  Satan  will  deceive  many.  However,  the  truths 
of  Christianity  will  become  dominant  and  by  reason  of  the 
government  of  Christ  and  the  Church  of  the  firstborn  the 
kingdom  will  be  a  kingdom  of  righteousness  and  justice. 
Although  the  kind  of  government  is  not  described  in  detail, 
still  we  direct  attention  to  the  fact  that  the  rule  of  the 
believers  with  Christ  is  not  only  said  to  be   fiaaiXevaovaiv 

(Rev.     20:     6),     but     also     as      Troi/xam     avTOV<;     Iv     pd/38(i)     aiSrjpa 

(Rev.  2:  27;  19:  15).  This  government  will,  therefore,  be 
one  of  love,  but  also  of  strict  shepherdizing,  so  that  ex- 
ternally, at  least,  the  nations  will  be  compelled  to  obey  the 
principles  of  the  Christocracy.  In  this  sense  the  millennium 
will  be  a  judgment  period  or  a  judgment  day,  although  it 
will  continue  to  be  a  period  of  grace.  In  this  connection 
we  may  mention  that  some  commentators  have  interpreted 
the  thousand  years  as  being  the  days  of  the  Son  of  man 
during  the  period  of  the  Second  Coming,  referring  to  2 
Peter  3 :  8,  "One  day  is  with  the  Lord  as  a  thousand  years, 
and  a  thousand  years  as  one  day."  To  the  millennial  gov- 
ernment the  objection  has  been  raised  that  the  peculiar 
situation  would  arise  that  glorified  men  with  spiritual  bodies 
would  associate  with  the  inhabitants  of  the  earth.  The 
adherents  of  Premillennialism  answer  that  the  Logos  led 
the  Children  of  Israel  in  the  wilderness,  and  they  point  out 
the  repeated  theophanies  in  the  Old  Testament,  the  appear- 
ance of  Moses  and  Elias  on  the  Mount  of  Transfiguration 


THE   SECOND  COMING   OF  CHRIST.  533 

and  the  appearance  of  our  Lord  between  His  resurrection 
and  ascension.  The  visible  appearance  and  association  of 
glorified  saints  with  men  on  earth  would  be  like  Christ's 
appearances  between  His  resurrection  and  ascension.  But 
with  Christ  the  saints  would  rule  from  the  New  Jerusalem 
in  the  sky.  The  following  Scripture  passages  are  taken  to 
refer  to  the  millennium :  Isa.  32 :  1 ;  33  :  20—24 ;  62 :  1—7 ; 
65 :  19—25 ;  Daniel  7 :  13,  14,  27 ;  Zech.  8 :  20—23 ;  14 :  16 
—21 ;  Matt.  26 :  29 ;  Luke  22 :  29,  30 ;  Acts  3 :  20,  21.  How- 
ever, the  kingdom  of  God  will  not  cease  after  the  thousand 
years,  whatever  be  its  form  and  activity  during  that  time, 
inasmuch  as  the  kingdom  is  an  eternal  kingdom.  Compare 
Isa.  66:  22;  Daniel  2:  44;  7:  14;  Rev.  11 :  15;  21 :  1 ;  22:  5. 
The  manner  in  which  the  transition  to  the  eternal  kingdom 
of  glory  is  to  be  effected  is  not  as  important  as  the  eternal 
existence  of  the  kingdom.  The  prelude  to  a  musical  com- 
position is  beautiful  and  important  as  preparing  the  way 
for  the  composition,  but  the  composition  itself  is  of  prime 
importance.  While  we  may  not  succeed  in  fixing  definitely 
the  doctrine  of  the  millennium,  still  it  is  certain  that  Christ 
shall  come  again  and  with  Him  the  kingdom  of  God. 

4.  Notes  on  the  History  of  Dogma. 
The  oldest  Church  Fathers  accepted  the  doctrine  of  the 
millennium  and  Premillennialism.  But  Chiliasm  lost  its  hold 
as  the  persecutions  ceased  and  Christianity  became  the  state 
religion.  Augustine  rejected  Chiliasm  and  declared  that 
the  Church  was  the  promised  kingdom.  During  the  Cath- 
olic Scholastic  period  there  were  not  many  who  looked  for 
a  millennium,  inasmuch  as  the  triumphant  Catholic  Church 
answered  to  all  expectations  in  that  direction.  The  Re- 
formers thought  that  the  end  of  the  world  was  near  at 
hand,  for  which  reason  they  did  not  accept  the  theory  of  a 
millennium  before  the  second  coming  of  Christ,  unless  it  be 
in  the  sense  that  the  whole  of  the  New  Testament  period 
was  such  a  millennium.  The  Augsburg  Confession  rejected 
or  condemned  the  fanaticism  of  the  Anabaptists.  The  old 
Dogmaticians  placed  the  millennium  in  the  past  and  stated 


534  KSCHATOI.fXiY. 

in  general  that  all  the  final  eschatological  occurrences  will 
take  place  at  one  time  and  that  the  eternal  kingdom  of  glory 
will  begin  without  any  transition  period.  The  eschatological 
question  has  become  the  subject  of  much  careful  investiga- 
tion in  modern  times,  but  there  is  no  unanimity  in  positions 
taken.  The  Wiirtemberg  School,  and  especially  Bengel, 
aroused  great  interest  in  the  study  of  prophecy,  and  par- 
ticularly in  Chiliasm.  This  theory  has  gained  many  ad- 
herents in  the  Reformed  Church,  and  certain  sects  have 
indeed  arisen  which  have  especially  supported  this  doctrine. 
In  the  Lutheran  Church  there  are  many  who  accept  a  mil- 
lennium, but  not  a  few  stand  by  the  old  dogmatic  view, 
while  others  feel  that  they  cannot  take  a  definite  position 
on  the  question.  There  are  three  schools  that  have  espe- 
cially made  their  influence  felt  in  eschatological  questions 
in  modern  times,  namely,  the  Preterist,  the  Historical  and 
the  Futurist  schools  of  interpretation.  The  Preterists  take 
the  position  that  the  greater  part  of  the  prophecies  of  Reve- 
lations were  fulfilled  during  the  first  centuries,  that  Nero 
was  Antichrist,  and  that  the  millennial  kingdom  is  the  king- 
dom of  grace  on  earth  between  the  first  and  second  advents 
of  Christ.  The  Historical  school  states  that  the  events  of 
history  are  foretold  in  the  prophetical  writings.  The  Papacv 
is  regarded  as  the  occidental  Antichrist,  while  Moham- 
medanism is  regarded  as  the  oriental  Antichrist.  The 
events  of  history  are  symbolized  by  the  prophetical  seals, 
trumpets,  bowls,  etc.  Among  the  interpreters  of  the  His- 
torical school  are  to  be  found  premillennians  and  postmil- 
lennians.  The  premillennians  teach  that  Christ  comes  be- 
fore the  thousand  years,  and  the  postmillennians  that  He 
comes  after  the  thousand  years.  Others  of  this  school  place 
the  millennium  in  the  past  or  else  declare  it  to  be  the  victo- 
ries of  the  Christian  Church  during  the  New  Testament 
period,  while  the  majority  expect  a  future  millennium.  The 
Futurists  take  the  position  that  the  majority  of  the  prophe- 
cies in  the  Book  of  Revelation  are  to  find  their  fulfillment 
in  the  future,  that  Antichrist  is  to  come  and  that  he  will  be 
destroyed  at  the  second  coming  of  Christ,  that  Satan  is  to 


THE   SECOND   COMING    OK   CHRIST.  535 

be  bound  and  that  the  millennium  will  begin  after  the  first 
resurrection,  etc.  But  som  Futurists  are  postmillennians. 
It  may  be  stated  finally  that  there  are  some  theologians  who 
have  adopted  both  the  historical  and  futurist  methods  of 
interpretation  and  declare  that  the  development  of  history 
typifies  the  literal  fulfillment  of  prophecy. 

Lately  a  new  prophetical  school  has  been  formed  which 
has  won  many  adherents.  This  may  be  called  the  Historico- 
Futurist  school.  According  to  Biblical  Hermeneutics,  only 
one  meaning  can  be  correct.  In  the  Old  Testament  the 
advent  of  the  Messiah  was  not  presented  as  two  advents, 
but  the  New  Testament  in  describing  the  first  advent  prom- 
ises a  second  advent  of  Christ,  when  the  remaining  prophe- 
cies will  be  fulfilled.  It  is  only  two  phases  of  the  advent 
and  there  is,  therefore,  no  double  meaning.  What  refers 
to  the  first  phase  has  only  one  meaning,  and  the  case  is  the 
same  in  the  second  phase.  Therefore,  when  prophecies  are 
fulfilled  in  past  and  present  history,  the  same  prophecies 
cannot  have  a  future  fulfillment.  If  the  millennium  has 
been  fulfilled  in  the  past  or  is  now  realized,  a  new  millen- 
nium of  the  same  kind  cannot  be  expected.  The  New  Testa- 
ment speaks  of  the  thousand  years  only  in  one  chapter. 
The  thousand  years  are  either  past,  present  or  future.  A 
future  event  may  have  types  and  there  may  be  historical 
foundations  which  develop  into  a  climax,  but  there  is  only 
one  real  fulfillment.  The  prophecies  in  the  Book  of  Revela- 
tion cannot  have  two  meanings,  but  there  may  be  historical 
foundations  and  developments  leading  to  a  climax  which  is 
the  fulfillment.  According  to  the  Historico-Futurist  school 
the  prophesied  future  event  may  have  historical  develop- 
ments leading  to  the  time  of  the  actual  fulfillment.  The 
Book  of  Revelations  contains  three  main  divisions,  the  last 
beginning  with  the  fourth  chapter.  If  the  last  main  divi- 
sion describes  the  last  phase  of  the  actual  fulfillment,  we 
still  find  that  the  historical  background  and  development 
is  more  or  less  pictured.  In  some  chapters  of  the  prophetical 
books  we  are  reminded  of  the  recapitulation  principle  of 
Biblical  Hermeneutics. 


536  ESCHATOLOGY. 

Baknabas,  Pai'ias  and  Hkumas  accepted  the  doctrine  of  a  millennium. 
JnsTix  Maktyk  says  that  Christ  shall  reign  in  the  restored  Jerusalem 
a  thousand  years.  He  quotes  Isa.  65  and  Rev.  20.  Irex.kis  taught 
that  together  with  the  saints  Christ  would  reign  a  thousand  years 
after  the  power  of  Antichrist  had  been  destroyed.  He  found  the  days 
of  creation  typical  days,  each  one  meaning  a  thousand  years.  He 
says  that  Matt.  19:  29  and  26:  29  refer  to  the  millennium.  Tertuixian 
also  accepted  the  theory  of  the  millennium.  Origex  rejected  the  doc- 
trine of  Chiliasm. 

Lactantius  believed  in  the  millennium.  He  declared  that  the  world 
in  its  present  form  would  continue  6,000  years,  but  that  the  seventh 
millennium  would  be  a  sabbath.  Naturally  Chiliasm  became  dis- 
credited more  and  more  as  the  Church  won  recognition  by  the  State 
through  Constantine.  Augustine  rejected  the  traditional  doctrine  of 
the  millennium.  He  probably  was  the  first  to  present  the  Preterist 
theory  of  interpretation,  containing 'the  following  points:  That  Satan 
was  bound  at  the  first  advent  of  Christ;  by  the  first  resurrection  is 
meant  the  spiritual  resurrection  from  spiritual  death;  the  thousand 
years  are  the  kingdom  of  grace  upon  the  earth;  at  the  end  of  this 
time  Satan  will  be  loosed  again,  persecutions  will  take  place  under 
Antichrist,  after  which  will  follow  the  second  coming  of  Christ,  the 
resurrection,  the  judgment  and  the  new  world  order.  According  to 
another  view  of  the  Preterist  school,  Nero  was  the  Antichrist. 

The  theologians  did  not  greatly  occupy  themselves  with  investiga- 
tions concerning  the  millennium  during  the  Scholastic  period.  About 
the  year  1000  there  were  many  who  expected  the  coming  of  dies  irae 
and  the  end  of  the  world.  The  historical  method  of  interpretation 
made  its  appearance  in  the  eleventh  century  and  the  Book  of  Revela- 
tion was  viewed  as  an  historical  compendium.  There  were  many 
devoted  believers  who  began  to  fear  that  the  Papacy  was  Antichrist. 

LuTiiER  believed  that  the  second  advent  of  the  Lord  was  at  hand. 
He  counted  the  millennium  from  the  time  of  the  first  advent  of  Christ 
as  well  as  from  the  writing  of  the  Book  of  Revelation.  Gog  and  Magog 
are  the  Turks.  At  the  time  of  Luther  there  were  no  conservative 
theologians  who  expected  a  period  of  triumph  for  the  Church  before 
the  second  coming  of  Christ.  The  Futurist  theory  of  interpretation, 
which  was  accepted  in  the  ancient  Church,  came  to  life  again  toward 
the  close  of  the  sixteenth  century.  The  Jesuits  Ribera  and  Alcazar 
accepted  this  theory  for  reasons  that  are  apparent.  Gerhard  said  that 
the  period  of  a  thousand  years  began  with  Constantine,  at  which  time 
Satan  was  bound.  The  millennial  period  closed  during  the  fifteenth 
century.  Grotius  taught  that  heathen  Rome  was  Antichrist  and  that 
the  millennium  began  with  Constantine  and  closed  when  the  Turks 
captured  Constantinople.  Spenkr  hoped  for  better  times  in  the  future 
and  was  supposed  to  favor  a  refined  form  of  Chiliasm.     Whitby  pre- 


THE   SECOND   COMING   OF  CHRIST.  537 

sentecl  the  theory  of  Postmillennialism,  which  sets  forth  a  spiritual 
millennium  before  the  advent  of  Christ.  Antichrist  will  come  before 
the  millennium  and  Christ  at  its  close.  Bengel  made  peculiar  calcula- 
tions. He  assumed  that  Satan  would  be  bound  a  thousand  years  and 
that  these  thousand  years  would  precede  the  thousand  years  in  which 
the  saints  would  reign.  He  therefore  extended  the  millennium  to  two 
thousand  years  and  believed  that  it  would  begin  in  1836.  But  Bengel 
himself  said  that  if  the  year  1836  passed  without  any  special  change, 
then  there  must  be  some  radical  fault  with  his  calculations. 

AuBEKLEN  accepted  the  doctrine  of  a  millennium,  although  he  seems 
to  interpret  the  question  of  time  symbolically.  He  says  that  Rev.  20 
is  not  the  only  place  which  deals  with  this  subject.  Hengstenbebg 
taught  that  the  millennium  began  with  Charlemagne.  Eixiot  and 
Gaussen  supported  the  doctrine  of  a  millennium.  Von  Hofmann 
taught  that  a  millennium  would  come  when  the  glorified  Church  would 
not  only  reign  over  the  nations  of  the  earth  but  also  dwell  there,  so 
that  there  would  be  found  on  the  earth  a  contrast  between  the  glorified 
and  the  unglorified  human  and  natural  life.  Philippi  viewed  the  time 
limit  as  the  expression  of  a  protracted  period  which  began  with  the 
victory  of  Christianity  over  heathenism,  when  the  Church  of  Christ 
became  dominant.  Frank  discusses  at  the  close  of  his  Dogmatics  the 
goal  of  a  humanity  consecrated  to  God.  The  final  goal  is  prepared 
through  the  general  preaching  of  the  Gospel,  the  conversion  of  Israel, 
the  appearance  of  Antichrist  and  his  judgment,  the  second  coming  of 
Christ,  the  first  resurrection  and  the  millennium.  He  therefore  sup- 
ports the  doctrine  of  a  future  millennium  which  will  be  the  Church's 
period  of  triumph.  This  kingdom  will  begin  with  the  second  advent 
of  Christ.  Luthardt  accepts  the  doctrine  of  a  coming  millennium 
and  adopts  the  premillennian  view.  Among  Swedish  theologians  who 
accept  the  doctrine  of  a  future  millennium  and  have  adopted  premil- 
lennian views  may  be  mentioned  Bring,  who  in  his  Dogmatics  ex- 
presses himself  as  follows:  "The  Book  of  Revelation  Is  the  capstone 
or  the  chief  corner  stone,  as  Genesis  is  the  foundation  stone  in  the 
great  temple  building  of  the  Holy  Scriptures.  But  in  Revelation  there 
is  also  a  foundation  stone  which  is  to  be  found  in  the  doctrine  of  the 
kingdom  of  Christ  and  the  victory  of  the  saints  on  the  earth  together 
with  the  binding  of  Satan  for  a  thousand  years.  Without  this  victory 
the  history  of  the  Christian  Church  would  lack  the  relative  denoue- 
ment which  is  required  in  the  very  conception  of  the  kingdom.  At- 
tempts have  been  made  to  escape  the  doctrine  of  the  future  millennium 
contained  in  the  Book  of  Revelation  by  placing  it  in  the  past.  Some 
have  begun  this  kingdom  with  Constantine,  as  the  old  Lutheran  Dog- 
maticians  do,  counting  their  terminus  ad  quern  the  establishment  of 
the  Turkish  empire,  when  the  devil  was  loosed,  or  else  from  the  time 
of  Charlemagne.     But   In   any  case   the   description   contained   in  the 


538  i;sciiATOi,0(;Y. 

Apocalypse  of  John  cannot  be  conceived  of  as  corresponding  to  the 
world  situation  during  the  periods  above  mentioned,  provided  one  does 
not  idealize  the  world  situations  and  at  the  same  time  discredit  the 
ideal  conditions  set  forth  by  the  prophet  as  being  descriptive  of  the 
glory  of  the  millennial  kingdom.  So  far  as  Chiliasm.  is  concerned  and 
the  condemnatory  expressions  of  the  Augsburg  Confession  in  connec- 
tion therewith,  we  would  state  that  these  words  of  condemnation  are 
directed  against  the  carnal  conception  of  the  millennium  as  held  by 
the  Anabaptists  and  their  still  more  carnal  attempts  to  realize  this 
kingdom."  Bring  believes  that  Antichrist  will  finally  appear  in  per- 
sonal form  and  that  he  will  be  destroyed  at  the  second  coming  of  Christ. 
He  interprets  the  first  resurrection  in  a  literal  sense.  With  regard  to 
the  government  during  the  millennium  he  says:  "The  heavenly  Church 
together  with  the  resurrected  believers  will  rule  with  Christ  from 
heaven  and  not  on  the  earth.  In  order  that  the  latter  might  be  realized 
there  would  be  necessary  a  new  earth  and  not  only,  as  might  be  ex- 
pected during  a  millennium,  a  partly  glorified  earth.  A  glorified 
heavenly  Church  in  the  midst  of  ordinary  men  with  flesh  and  blood 
would  certainly  appear  extraordinary  and  magical.  It  is  sufficient  that 
the  heavenly  Church  stands  in  such  close  and  living  relationship  with 
the  Church  on  earth  during  the  millennial  period  that  great  heavenly 
powers  are  imparted  to  the  latter."  Mvki!ekg  also  sets  forth  a  millen- 
nium, but  the  time  limit  he  interprets  symbolically  as  meaning  a  pro- 
tracted aeon  of  time  when  Satan  will  be  bound.  To  be  sure  there  will 
be  sin,  but  it  will  have  lost  its  force  and  will  not  appear  as  a  world 
power.  The  kingdom  of  Christ  will  be  dominant.  Many  more  quota- 
tions could  be  made,  but  it  is  not  necessary.  Opinions  are  divided,  but 
the  majority  who  expect  a  coming  millennium  reject  the  theory  of 
gross  Chiliasm.  There  are  some  who  prefer  the  theory  of  the  old 
Dogmaticians  who  believed  that  the  millennium  to  a  greater  or  less 
degree  corresponds  with  the  present  period,  which  began  either  with 
the  establishment  of  the  Christian  Church  or  with  the  overcoming  of 
heathenism  by  the  Church  in  the  fourth  century,  but  they  do  not 
desire  to  deny  the  possible  truth  of  the  futuristic  and  premillennian 
theories  of  interpretation.  There  are  others  who  decidedly  reject  mil- 
lennialism  in  every  form  and  especially  the  Futurist  view.* 


*  Many  modern  theologians  hold  that  the  millennium  or  thousand 
years  covers  the  same  period  which  is  called  the  Day  of  Jehovah. 
This  day  of  the  Lord  begins  with  the  second  advent  period  and  con- 
tinues until  the  appearance  of  the  new  earth  and  the  new  heavens. 
It  is  clear  that  the  day  of  the  Lord  cannot  be  an  ordinary  day.  The 
days  of  the  Son  of  man  at  the  first  advent  lasted  nearly  thirty-four 
years.  The  second  advent  period  may  last  longer.  If  such  be  the  case, 
it  will  be  easier  to  harmonize  many  passages,  such  as  2  Peter  3:  10. 
When  Peter  says  that  a  thousand  years  are  to  the  Lord  as  a  day,  it  is 
plain  that  the  burning  of  the  earth  and  heavens  does  not  necessarily 
mean  a  renovation  of  the  earth  and  heavens 'at  the  beginning  of  the 


THE    SECOND   COMIXG    OF   CHRIST.  539 

In  regard  to  the  second  advent  many  modern  theologians  make  a 
distinction  between  two  stages  {rrapovaLa  and  eTrL<fidveia ) ,  tlie  former 
called  Rapture  and  the  second  Epiphany.  According  to  these  theo- 
logians the  Rapture  preceded  by  a  division  in  the  first  resurrection 
would  occur  before  the  great  tribulation.  Some  Lutheran  exegetes 
hold  this  view.  Among  them  may  be  mentioned  Seiss.  He  holds  that 
the  "Elders"  in  chapter  four  in  Revelation  are  those  who  were  in  the 
first  Rapture  at  the  second  advent.  We  quote  from  his  Lectures  on 
the  Apocalypse:  "They  were  saints  from  earth,  for  they  sing"  of  being 
redeemed  by  Christ's  blood  'out  of  every  kindred,  and  tongue,  and 
tribe,  and  people.'  They  are  in  resurrection  life,  for  they  are  enthroned 
and  crowned;  and  no  saints  are  crowned  till  'the  resurrection  of  the 
just.'  —  They  are  already  in  heaven,  before  ever  a  seal  is  broken,  a 
trumpet  sounded,  or  a  bowl  of  wrath  emptied."  Seiss  belonged  to  the 
Futurist  school  of  prophecy.  We  also  quote  the  following  from  Seiss: 
"It  is  thus  clfear  and  manifest,  even  to  the  extent  of  demonstration 
itself,  that  the  first  resurrection  is  not  one  summary  event,  but  is  made 
up  of  various  resurrections  and  translations  at  different  times,  begin- 
ning with  the  resurrection  of  Christ,  who  is  the  head  and  front  of 
'the  resurrection  of  the  just,'  and  receiving  its  last  additions  some- 
where about  the  final  overthrow  of  the  Beast  and  his  armies."  The 
upholders  of  the  Rapture  theory  base  their  belief  on  Rev.  4  and  5; 
Luke  21:  28:  "When  these  things  begin — your  redemption  draweth 
nigh";  Rom.  8:  23;  John  14:  2,  3;  Matt.  24:  27,  28  (note  that  the 
tribulation  follows)  ;  1  Thess.  4:  13—17;  Luke  21:  35,  36,  the  last  verse 
reading,  "But  watch  ye  at  every  season,  making  supplication,  that 
ye  may  prevail  to  escape  all  these  things  that  shall  come  to  pass,  and 
to  stand  before  the  Son  of  man";  Rev.  3:  10;  all  passages  relating  to 
watching  are  also  used,  because  watching  is  necessary,  as  the  Lord 
may  come  sooner  than  expected;  if  signs  would  be  very  plain,  like  the 
great  tribulation,  then  people  would  calculate;  "Watch  therefore:  for 
ye  know  not  on  what  day  your  Lord  cometh"  (Matt.  24:  42);  compare 
the  preceding  context  and  verse  44:  "Therefore  be  ye  also  ready;  for 
in  an  hour  that  ye  think  not  the  Son  of  man  cometh."  H.  Grattan 
Guinness,  who  belonged  to  the  Historical  school  of  prophecy,  and  who 
was  a  prominent  student  of  prophecy,  does  not  favor  the  distinction 
of  Rapture  and  Revelation  with  such  a  chronological  calculation  as  the 
Futurists  hold,  but  he  teaches  that  the  Rapture  takes  place  first  and 
the  Epiphany  follows,  without  speculating  in  regard  to  the  length  of 
time  between  the  two  events.     In  referring  to  Rev.  19,  describing  the 

day  of  the  Lord,  and  the  fire  may  occur  both  at  the  beginning  and 
close  of  the  thousand  years.  In  Obadiah  15  we  read:  "For  the  day  of 
Jehovah  is  near  upon  all  nations."  In  Joel  we  read  five  times  of  the 
day  of  Jehovah.  Compare  Hosea  11th  chapter;  Isaiah  2:  12 — 21;  13: 
9—13,  and  study  especially  "Isaiah's  Apocalypse,"  chapters  2'l-27; 
Zephaniah  1:   14 — 18,  etc. 


540  ESCHATOLOGY. 

Epiphany,  he  says:  "He  who  had  previously  come  for  His  people  now 
comes  with  them;  not  that  there  are  two  future  comings  of  Christ, 
but  only  one.  That  coming,  however,  has  not  only  two  aspects,  but 
two  stages."  Guinness  believed  that  the  Papacy  is  the  Western  Anti- 
christ and  Mohammedanism  the  Eastern,  and  that  we  live  near  the 
judgment  period.  He  also  says:  "While,  therefore,  we  see  no  authority 
for  making  chronological  distinctions  between  separate  stages  of  the 
one  advent,  we  see,  on  the  other  hand,  abundant  reason  in  Scripture 
to  believe  that  the  millennial  reign  of  Christ  will  not  be  fully  estab- 
lished in  a  day  or  year.  It  must  be  remembered  that  He  comes,  not 
peacefully  to  ascend  a  vacant  and  waiting  throne,  welcomed  by  a 
willing  people,  but  to  dispossess  a  mighty  usurper  and  to  overthrow 
a  great  rebellion,  to  right  the  accumulated  wrong  of  ages."  Fjellstedt 
in  Sweden  has  exercised  a  great  influence  in  shaping  eschatological 
thought  according  to  the  grammatical,  literal  understanding  of  the 
text,  when  such  exegesis  was  possible.  He  entertained  the  belief  in 
a  millennium,  but  not  in  the  sense  that  Christ  will  rule  from  David's 
throne  in  the  earthly  Jerusalem.  He  believed  that  there  will  be  a  first 
resurrection  before  the  millennium,  but  favored  no  speculations  in 
regard  to  the  length  of  time  between  two  stages  in  the  second  advent. 


§43.     THE  RESURRECTION. 

The  doctrine  of  the  resurrection  is  most  closely  related 
to  Christianity.  The  resurrection  of  our  bodies,  or  the 
resurrection  of  the  dead,  is  based  upon  the  resurrection  of 
Christ.  We  may  say  that  our  resurrection  is  founded  po- 
tentially in  the  resurrection  of  Christ.  He  was  the  first  to 
arise  from  the  dead  with  a  pneumatic  glorified  body,  for 
which  reason  He  is  called  the  firstfruits  of  them  that  are 
asleep.  When  He  shall  come  again  out  of  the  land  of  the 
living,  then  will  break  the  dawn  of  the  everlasting  day, 
then  the  great  Easter  morning  will  come  and  the  Christian 
hope  will  be  realized.  Man  is  a  spiritual  and  material 
entity.  The  body,  which  is  an  integral  part  of  man,  must 
arise,  which  means  that  the  whole  person  will  arise.  In 
the  resurrection  man  appears  in  his  fully  developed  form. 
The  intermediate  state  does  not  bring  with  it  the  fully 
developed  forms  either  of  death  or  life.  When  the  resur- 
rection has  taken  place,  then  will  follow  either  the  second 
death  or  eternal  life.    All  men  will  arise,  but  the  resurrec- 


THE    RESUKUECTION.  541 

tion  to  the  fullness  of  everlasting  life  is  the  resurrection 
which  all  true  believers  long  and  strive  for.  We  may  be 
absolutely  certain  that  even  the  spirits  of  just  men  made 
perfect  long  for  the  day  of  Christ  and  the  resurrection  of 
life. 

1.    The  Definition  of  the  Resurrection. 

HoLLAZius  defines  as  follows:*  "The  resurrection  of 
the  dead  is  the  ivork  of  the  Triune  God  through  ivhich  all 
the  dead  ivill  at  the  right  tiyne  receive  the  same  bodies  ivhich 
they  had  in  life,  awakened  fro7n  the  dead  and  reunited  ivith 
their  soids,  unto  the  fidl  participation  of  eternal  salvation 
or  condemnation,  and  unto  the  manifestation  of  the  divine 
justice,  both  reynunerative  and  punitive."  Hollazius  also 
defines  resuscitatio,  which  stands  in  relation  to  resurrectio 
as  causa  to  effectus. 

With  regard  to  the  active  causes  the  old  Dogmaticians 
say:  1)  causa  efficiens  principalis  is  the  Triune  God  and 
especially  Christ,  the  God-man;  2)  causa  impidsiva  interna 
is  the  divine  justice,  justitia  remuneratoria  with  regard  to 
the  godly  and  vindicativa  with  regard  to  the  ungodly;  3) 
causa  impulsiva  exteryia  is,  in  relation  to  the  godly,  the 
merit  of  Christ  as  accepted  through  faith,  and  in  relation 
to  the  ungodly,  impenitence.  Compare  the  following  Scrip- 
ture passages:  "Knowing  that  he  that  raised  up  the  Lord 
Jesus,  shall  raise  up  us  also  with  Jesus"  (2  Cor.  4:  14;  cf. 
John  5:  21)  ;  "The  dead  shall  hear  the  voice  of  the  Son  of 
God"  (John  5 :  25,  28)  ;  "I  will  raise  him  up  at  the  last  day" 
(John  6:  54)  ;  "But  if  the  Spirit  of  him  that  raised  up 
Jesus  from  the  dead  dwelleth  in  you,  he  that  raised  up 
Christ  Jesus  from  the  dead  shall  give  life  also  to  your 
mortal  bodies  through  his  Spirit  that  dwelleth  in  you" 
(Rom.  8:  11).  Compare  Luther's  explanation  of  the  third 
article  of  the  Creed. 

*  HoLLAZirs:  "Resurrectio  mortuorum  est  opus  Dei  Triunius,  quo 
defuncti  homines  omnes  eadem  numero  corpora,  quae  in  hac  vita  lia- 
buerunt,  e  morte  excitata,  et  cum  animabus  suis  redunita  recipient, 
ad  plenam  beatitudinis  aut  damnationis  ffiternse  participationem,  et  ad 
manifestationem  justitise  divinse  remuneratoriae  et  vindicativse." 


542  KSCIIATOLOGY. 

2.    Further  Definition  of  the  Resurrection. 

Subjectum  quod  resiirrectionis,  i.  e.,  the  subjects  of  the 
act  of  the  resurrection,  are  all  men.  Compare  John  5 :  28, 
29.  The  resurrection  may  then  be  divided  into  the  resur- 
rection of  the  righteous  and  of  the  unrighteous.  The  resur- 
rection of  the  righteous  takes  place  first.  Jesus  speaks  of 
the  resurrection  of  the  believers  as  follows :  ''But  they  that 
are  accounted  worthy  to  attain  to  that  world  and  the  resur- 
rection from  the  dead"  (Luke  20:  35).  The  Greek  words 
for  the  resurrection  from  the  dead  are:  t^s  amo-rao-ews  t^s  Ik 
veKpwv.  Paul  also  strove  to  attain  unto  this  resurrection  from 
the  dead  —  tis  t^v  i^avdaTaaLv  ti)v  Ik  vcKpwv  (Phil.  3 :  11) .  Com- 
pare the  following  passages:  "But  each  in  his  own  order: 
Christ  the  firstfruits;  then  they  that  are  Christ's,  at  his 
coming"  (1  Cor.  15:  23)*;  "The  dead  shall  be  raised  incor- 
ruptible, and  we  shall  be  changed"  (1  Cor.  15:  52)  ;  "The 
dead  in  Christ  shall  rise  first"  (1  Thess.  4:  16)  ;  "Blessed 
and  holy  is  he  that  hath  part  in  the  first  resurrection"  (Rev. 
20:  6).  Without  dogmatically  determining  the  lapse  of 
time  between  the  first  and  second  resurrection,  it  is  evident 
that  the  believers  arise  first  at  the  coming  of  the  Lord  and 
that  the  faithful  believers  who  are  living  upon  the  earth 
are  thereafter  changed,  before  the  remaining  dead  are 
raised  up.    This  is  the  Biblical  sequence  as  to  the  resurrec- 

*  When  it  is  stated  that  Christ  is  the  firstfruits  of  them  that  are 
asleep,  that  is,  that  He  was  the  first  to  arise  from  the  dead  with  a 
pneumatic  body,  we  must  bear  in  mind  that  others  also  arose  imme- 
diately after  His  resurrection.  They  could  not  arise  first,  inasmuch  as 
Christ  was  the  firstfruits,  although  their  graves  were  probably  opened 
at  the  death  of  Christ.  Compare  Matt.  27:  52,  53.  It  is  not  probable 
that  these  saints  arose  with  their  earthly  bodies  and  afterwards  died 
again,  but  they  arose  as  the  saints  shall  arise  at  the  second  advent  of 
our  Lord.  Noiirhokg  says  in  his  sermon  for  the  26th  Sunday  after 
Trinity  that  those  who  came  out  of  their  graves  at  the  resurrection  of 
Christ  are  excepted  from  the  last  resurrection,  inasmuch  as  they 
probably  ascended  to  heaven  with  the  Lord  at  His  ascension  and  now 
stand  with  glorified  bodies  before  the  throne  of  the  Lamb  in  heaven.  — 
There  is  a  possibility  that  these  resurrected  saints  are  the  same  persons 
as  those  who  in  Rev.  4:  4  are  called  the  twenty-four  elders.  The 
number  is  not  hereby  fixed,  but  they  are  called  elders  because  they 
^ere  the  first  to  arise  from  the  dead  after  Christ.  The  resurrection 
from  the  dead  is  called  a  regeneration.  The  twenty-four  elders  repre- 
"reut  tho  church  of  the  firstborn.  Since  then  no  one  has  arisen.  Corn- 
pure  1  Cor.  15:  23:  "Then  they  that  are  Christ's  at  his  coming." 


THE  RKSUKKECTIOX.  543 

tion,  and  the  lapse  of  time,  even  though  it  be  of  but  short 
duration,  between  the  resurrection  and  transformation  of 
the  believers  and  the  resurrection  of  the  unbelievers  implies 
judgment  for  the  latter.  The  resurrection  of  the  unbe- 
lievers is  called  the  resurrection  of  judgment  (John  5:  29). 
It  is  interesting  to  observe  that  Paul  received  a  special 
revelation  in  regard  to  the  immediate  events  at  the  return 
of  the  Lord.  In  1  Thess.  4 :  15  we  read  the  following  clear 
statement:  "For  this  we  say  unto  you  by  the  word  of  the 
Lord,  that  we  that  are  alive,  that  are  left  unto  the  coming 
of  the  Lord,  shall  in  no  wise  precede  them  that  are  fallen 
asleep.  For  the  Lord  himself  shall  descend  from  heaven, 
with  a  shout,  with  the  voice  of  the  archangel,  and  with  the 
trump  of  God ;  and  the  dead  in  Christ  shall  rise  first ;  then 
we  that  are  alive,  that  are  left,  shall  together  with  them 
be  caught  up  in  the  clouds,  to  meet  the  Lord  in  the  air ;  and 
so  shall  we  ever  be  with  the  Lord."  Compare  1  Cor.  15: 
51,  52:  "Behold,  I  tell  you  a  mystery:  We  all  shall  not  sleep, 
but  we  shall  all  be  changed  in  a  moment,  in  the  twinkling 
of  an  eye,  at  the  last  trump."  Compare  also  Luke  17 :  34, 
35 :  "In  that  night  there  shall  be  two  men  on  one  bed ;  the 
one  shall  be  taken,  and  the  other  shall  be  left.  There  shall 
be  two  women  grinding  together;  the  one  shall  be  taken, 
and  the  other  shall  be  left."  It  is  not  stated  what  will  im- 
mediately befall  those  that  are  left.  But  it  is  clearly  related 
what  will  befall  those  that  are  raised  from  the  dead  and 
those  living  who  are  changed.  Both  parties  are  caught  up 
in  the  clouds  to  meet  the  Lord  in  the  air  to  be  ever  with 
Him.  They  do  not  return  to  the  earth,  but  are  with  the 
Lord  in  the  events  that  will  follow  on  the  great  day  of  the 
Lord.  This  day  is  not  an  ordinary  day  in  length.  The  ex- 
pression first  resurrection  in  contradistinction  to  the  second 
occurs  only  in  Rev.  20.  But  1  Thess.  4 :  16 ;  1  Cor.  15 :  23 
and  the  expressions  "from  the  dead"  prove  plainly  that 
there  is  to  be  a  first  resurrection  at  Christ's  return.  Ac- 
cording to  the  literal,  grammatical  exegesis  of  Rev.  20 :  4 
— 6,  John  saw  different  orders  of  those  raised  from  the  dead, 
namely,  thrones  and  they  that  sat  upon  them,  martyrs  who 


544 


K.SCIIAIOI.OCY. 


had  been  beheaded  and  "such  as  worshipped  not  the  beast," 
etc.  The  first  resurrection  includes,  if  we  compare  also 
other  passages,  all  saints  who  have  lived  before  the  second 
advent.  The  first  division  mentioned  in  Rev.  20:  4  does 
not  refer  to  martyrs  only,  but  to  all  saints,  whether  martyrs 
or  not,  who  belong  to  the  first  resurrection  and  translation. 
We  should  also  notice  carefully  that  the  souls  in  Rev.  6 :  9 
— 11  especially,  the  two  witnesses  in  Rev.  11:  11,  the  man- 
child  (apirtv,  neuter  gender)  in  Rev.  12:  5  possibly,  Rev. 
14 :  1 — 5  describing  the  144,000,  and  the  second  and  third 
division  in  Rev.  20:  4  (compare  Rev.  7:  9 — 17)  refer  to  the 
sufferers  and  martyrs  during  the  great  tribulation  in  the 
time  of  the  two  beasts.  The  passages  in  the  Gospels,  in  the 
Acts  of  the  Apostles  and  in  the  Epistles  speak  of  the  resur- 
rection from  the  dead  of  all  believers  generally  and  the 
translation  of  them  and  the  living  at  the  second  advent. 
These  passages  also  declare  that  the  unbelievers  shall  rise. 
In  reference  to  the  children  of  God  it  is  stated,  "each  in  his 
own  order,"  but  in  regard  to  the  unbelievers  no  such  state- 
ment is  made.  Only  in  Rev.  20:  5  we  read:  "The  rest  of 
the  dead  lived  not  until  the  thousand  years  should  be  fin- 
ished." If  interpreters  have  many  opinions  in  reference  to 
the  exegesis  of  Rev.  20,  all  orthodox  exegetes  teach  a  general 
resurrection  on  the  great  day  of  the  Lord.  This  statement 
does  not  preclude  that  the  believers  arise  first,  as  previously 
explained. 

Subjectiim  quo  is  the  body.  In  the  Apostles'  Creed  the 
term  carnis  is  used  in  Latin  and  o-apKos  in  Greek,  but,  of 
course,  they  both  refer  to  the  resurrection  of  the  whole  man. 
both  body  and  soul.  The  reasons  that  the  expressions  credo 
carnis  resurrectionem  or  ttio-tcuw  aapK6<i  aväa-Taaiv  were  used, 
was  because  the  Church  Fathers  desired  thereby  to  empha- 
size the  reality  and  the  identity  of  the  body.  If  there  were 
no  such  identity,  then  we  could  not  speak  of  the  resurrec- 
tion of  the  body.  This  identity  does  not,  however,  imply 
that  all  the  atoms,  molecules  and  material  elements  of  the 
former  earthly  body  are  to  be  reproduced.  Even  during 
our  earthly  life  there  are  constant  changes  taking  place  in 


THE    RESURRECTION.  545 

our  bodies,  and  yet  our  identity  is  preserved.  The  resur- 
rection is  called  a  regeneration.  Human  life  is  produced 
from  a  protoplasmic  cell.  While  this  natural  process  will 
not  explain  the  mode  in  which  our  identity  is  preserved  in 
the  resurrection  body,  still  it  shows  how  identity  may  be 
preserved  through  change.  In  this  connection  we  call  to 
mind  the  figure  of  Paul  when  he  speaks  of  the  grain  of 
wheat  that  falls  into  the  ground  only  to  die  in  order  to  be- 
come quickened  and  produce  new  life  and  a  new  body. 
Compare  1  Cor.  15 :  35 — 38.  The  resurrection  body  is  there- 
fore in  a  sense  the  same  body  with  its  identity  preserved, 
but  at  the  same  time  it  is  a  new  body,  a  pneumatic  and 
heavenly  body.  With  regard  to  the  process  by  which  the 
old  body  is  raised  up  again  into  the  new  resurrection  body 
we  must  reject  the  theory  of  John  Scotus  Erigena,  who 
propounded  the  following  doctrine :  Anima  corpus  suum 
creat.  The  soul  does  not  create  the  new  body.  Even  though 
it  might  be  acknowledged  that  the  new  body  is  to  a  certain 
extent  the  consummated  product  of  the  potential  principle 
indwelling  in  the  spiritual  man  by  reason  of  the  living  com- 
munion with  Christ,  still  this  does  not  prove  that  the  new 
resurrection  body  is  produced  by  evolution  from  within. 
The  natural  body  is  produced  from  the  embryo  in  a  certain 
sense,  but  this  does  not  fully  explain  its  existence.  We 
must  remember  that  the  natural  body  is  dependent  on  its 
environment.  The  new,  spiritual,  resurrected  body  is 
likewise  dependent  on  its  environment.  There  is  therefore 
both  an  internal  and  an  external  principle.  But  throughout 
all  these  processes  it  is  God  that  is  active,  and  the  action 
becomes  supernatural  not  only  from  within,  but  also  from 
without  and  from  above.  Although  the  resurrection  is  a 
supernatural  act,  it  does  not  imply  an  origination  from 
nothing.  When  there  is  to  be  a  resurrection  of  the  body, 
there  must  be  a  connecting  link  between  the  old  and  the 
new  body.  But  this  connecting  link  cannot  be  a  material 
cell,  but  the  spiritual 'principle  behind  it.  In  Anthropology 
we  have  been  taught  that  behind  the  nucleus  in  the  ovum 
is  the  indestructible  invisible  principle  which  is  a  real  en- 


546  KSC'IIATOLOCY. 

tity.  In  death  this  invisible  principle,  which  also  had  a 
physical  spiritual  potency,  will  not  be  annihilated,  but  may 
be  the  connecting  link  between  the  former  body  as  to  iden- 
tity and  the  new  spiritual  body  in  the  resurrection.  This 
seems  to  be  much  more  plausible  when  we  consider  that  the 
soul,  being  immortal,  in  Christian  experience  does  not  even 
taste  death.  Besides,  all  men  existed  in  Adam  as  spiritual 
principles,  sinned  and  died  in  Adam.  Whereas  men  are  in- 
trinsically immortal  as  to  their  souls,  and  their  physical 
nature  belonged  to  their  existence  in  Adam  as  invisible  prin- 
ciples just  as  much  as  their  souls,  so  that  man  in  his  entirety 
has  both  body  and  soul,  the  resurrection  of  the  body  is  a 
necessity.  The  entire  human  being  will  therefore  experi- 
ence the  conditions  in  the  eternal  state.  To  God  no  one  is 
actually  dead,  but  all  live  to  Him.  Christ  stated  this  clearly 
to  the  Sadducees,  when  they  disputed  with  Him  about  the 
resurrection.*  We  would  call  attention  to  the  following  pas- 
sages: "When  Christ,  who  is  our  life,  shall  be  manifested, 
then  shall  ye  also  with  him  be  manifested  in  glory"  (Col. 
3:4);  ''He  that  eateth  my  flesh  and  drinketh  my  blood  hath 
eternal  life;  and  I  will  raise  him  up  at  the  last  day"  (John 
6:  54)  ;  "Who  shall  fashion  anew  the  body  of  our  humilia- 
tion, that  it  may  be  conformed  to  the  body  of  his  glory, 
according  to  the  working  whereby  he  is  able  even  to  subject 
all  things  to  himself"  (Phil.  3:  21).  The  bodies  of  the  un- 
godly are  also  produced  by  God  according  to  their  nature 
and  made  conformable  to  their  environment.  • 

The  following  attributes  are  ascribed  to  the  resurrection 
body  of  the  believer:  1)  spiritu.ale,  which  does  not  mean, 
however,  that  the  body  is  exclusively  spiritual.  Those  who 
are  resurrected  are  not  spirits,  but  possess  pneumatic  bodies 
which  have  spiritual  properties  and  are  no  longer  subject 
to  the  wants  and  conditions  of  the  natural  body.  Compare 
the  following  passages:  "It  is  raised  a  spiritual  body"  (1 
Cor.  15:  44)  ;  "Meats  for  the  belly,  and  the  belly  for  meats: 
but  God  shall  bring  to  nought  both  it»and  them"  (1  Cor.  6: 
13).     This  last  passage  does  not,  however,  prove  that  the 

♦  Compare  Lindberg,  Apologetics,  pp.  184 — 188. 


THE   RESURRECTION.  .  547 

saints  in  glory  do  not  eat  and  drink.  Compare  Luke  24: 
42,  43 ;  22  :  16 ;  Matt.  26 :  29.  Christ  ate  after  His  resurrec- 
tion, although  He  had  a  spiritual  body,  but  this  fact  does 
not  prove  that  He  needs  food;  only  that  He  can  partake  of 
food,  when  He  so  desires.  The  saints  raised  from  the  dead 
or  translated  while  living  are  also  able  to  eat  and  drink,  but 
they  do  not  need  sustenance  to  live.  Christ  intimates  quite 
plainly  the  possibility  of  the  use  of  food  in  His  Father's 
kingdom.  We  quote  what  He  said  at  the  first  Holy  Com- 
munion :  "But  I  say  unto  you,  I  shall  not  drink  henceforth 
of  this  fruit  of  the  vine,  until  that  day  when  I  drink  it  new 
with  you  in  my  Father's  kingdom."  Some  interpreters  ex- 
plain this  saying  figuratively.  But  such  exposition  is 
against  all  laws  of  grammar.  There  are  other  passages 
proving  the  possibility  of  the  use  of  food  for  enjoyment. 
Though  there  be  heavenly  food  for  enjoyment,  the  spiritual 
experience  of  the  heavenly  life  and  joy  is  the  most  important. 
"Eat  and  dr^nk  at  my  table  in  my  kingdom"  (Luke  22:  30)  ; 
"And  they  shall  come  from  the  east  and  west,  and  from  the 
north  and  south  and  shall  sit  down  in  the  kingdom  of  God" 
(13:  29);  2)  to-ayyeAov ;  "They  are  as  angels  in  heaven" 
(Matt.  22:  30)  ;  3)  glo^iosum;  cf.  Dan.  12:  3;  Matt.  13:  43; 
1  Cor.  15:  41;  Phil.  3:  21;  4)  incorruptible;  cf.  Luke  20: 
36 ;  1  Cor.  15 :  42,  53 ;  5)  iirovpdvLov;  "Are  sons  of  God"  (Luke 
20:  36)  ;  "As  is  the  heavenly,  such  are  they  also  that  are 
heavenly.  And  as  we  have  borne  the  image  of  the  earthy, 
we  shall  also  bear  the  image  of  the  heavenly"  (1  Cor.  15: 
48,  49). 

The  bodies  of  the  ungodly  are  also  spiritual  and  inde- 
structible, but  their  appearance  is  dishonorable,  correspond- 
ing to  their  inner  nature.  Their  resurrection  is  a  resurrec- 
tion unto  judgment.  They  can  suffer  and  will  suffer  and 
become  like  unto  the  evil  angels,  and  they  shall  be  sent  to 
the  place  prepared  for  the  devil  and  his  angels.  Compare 
the  following  passages:  "Vessels  of  wrath"  (Rom.  9:  22)  ; 
"Another  unto  dishonor"  (Rom.  9:  21);  "Some  unto  dis- 
honor" (2  Tim.  2:  20)  ;  "They  that  have  done  evil,  unto  the 
resurrection  of  judgment"   (John  5:  29).     The  Scriptures 


548  ESCHATOLOGY. 

do  not  speak  as  much  about  the  resurrection  of  the  ungodly 
as  of  the  godly.  It  is  stated  that  they  shall  arise,  but  the 
character  of  their  bodies  is  not  definitely  described.  The 
resurrection  of  the  ungodly  is  the  dark  side  of  the  general 
resurrection. 

3.  The  Object  of  the  Resurrection. 

Finis  resurrectionis  is  twofold:  1)  finis  proximus  in  re- 
lation to  the  blessed  is  the  full  realization  of  divine  glory, 
and  in  relation  to  the  ungodly  it  is  the  whole  import  of 
condemnation;  2)  finis  ultimus  is  the  glory  of  the  divine 
righteousness  and  justice. 

Inasmuch  as  man  is  a  material  and  spiritual  entity,  there- 
fore the  conditions  in  the  intermediate  state,  i.  e.,  the  com- 
fort of  Paradise  and  the  torment  of  Hades,  cannot  corre- 
spond to  the  object  of  God's  love  and  justice  in  relation  to 
man.  The  saints  are  indeed  called  in  Hebrews  12:  23  the 
spirits  of  just  men  made  perfect,  and  still  they  long  for  the 
resurrection.  Through  the  resurrection  they  become  alive 
again  in  the  full  sense  of  the  word  in  relation  to  the  normal 
state  of  human  existence  and  activity.  During  the  inter- 
mediate state  there  is  life,  to  be  sure,  but  in  a  sense  limited 
by  the  lack  of  a  bodily  organ,  especially  in  comparison  with 
the  external  and  active  life  that  is  begun  with  the  resurrec- 
tion and  continued  throughout  eternity  in  the  kingdom  of 
glory.  As  a  complete  person  man  has  lived,  labored  and 
sown  in  this  world  of  trial,  for  which  reason  it  is  but  natural 
that  man  should  also  live,  labor  and  reap  in  the  new  world, 
which  will  be  the  external  form  of  the  eternal  kingdom  of 
God.  The  ungodly  have  also  sown  unto  the  flesh,  wherefore 
they  shall  also  of  the  flesh  reap  corruption  in  the  eternal 
kingdom  of  death. 

4.  Notes  on  the  History  of  Dogma.' 
During  the  Apologetical  period  the  teaching  of  the  Bible 

with  regard  to  the  resurrection  was  accepted  with  childlike 
faith  and  hope.  The  resurrection  of  the  dead  was  indeed 
one  of  the  great  thoughts  of  Christianity.     It  was  taught 


THE   RESURRECTION.  /  549 

that  the  resurrection  body  would  be  identical  with  the 
earthly  body,  but  in  new  form.  Some  of  the  old  fathers 
believed  that  the  first  resurrection  would  take  place  at  the 
beginning  of  the  millennium  and  the  general  resurrection 
at  the  end  of  that  period.  There  was  no  special  develop- 
ment of  the  doctrine  of  the  resurrection  during  the  next  two 
periods,  although  attempts  were  made  to  prove  satisfac- 
torily the  possibility  and  necessity  of  the  resurrection.  The 
old  Lutheran  Dogmaticians  taught  that  the  resurrection 
consisted  formaliter  in  the  reproduction  of  the  former  body. 
They  distinguished  between  the  quickening  and  the  resur- 
rection. There  has  been  no  new  dogmatic  development 
during  modern  times.  There  are  some  who  have  adopted 
the  position  of  the  old  Dogmaticians,  while  others  have 
reverted  to  the  views  of  the  early  Church. 

Clemext  of  Rome  sets  forth  night  and  day  together  with  the  fable 
of  Phoenix  as  analogies  of  the  resurrection.  Justin  Martyr  speaks  of 
two  resurrections,  one  before,  the  other  after  the  millennium.  He 
believed  that  in  eternity  we  will  possess  the  same  body  with  all  its 
members  and  that  the  sex  difference  will  continue.  Iren.eus  said  that 
the  resurrection  is  a  less  wonderful  miracle  than  the  creation.  He 
believed  that  the  same  substance  would  arise  and  that  the  general 
resurrection  would  take  place  after  the  millennium.  Tertttllian 
taught  that  the  believers  would  arise  at  the  beginning  of  the  millen- 
nium, but  not  all  at  one  time,  since  some  would  by  reason  of  short- 
comings be  compelled  to  remain  some  time  in  the  spiritual  world. 
Origen  adopted  the  view  that  the  new  body  would  develop  out  of  the 
basic  material  of  the  old  body.  There  would  not  be  new  material  in 
the  new  body,  merely  a  new  form. 

Lactantius  set  forth  two  resurrections  and  stated  that  the  bodies 
of  the  believers  would  become  more  psychic  at  the  beginning  of  the 
millennium,  but  at  the  end  of  that  period  more  pneumatic  or  like  that 
of  the  angels.  Ambrose  proves  the  necessity  of  the  resurrection  by 
reason  of  the  fact  that  the  body  has  participated  in  good  as  well  as 
evil  deeds.  He  sets  forth  natural  proofs,  but  lays  the  greatest  stress 
on  the  fact  that  there  had  been  resurrections  already,  such  as  the 
resurrection  of  Christ  and  those  who  arose  with  Him.  Gregory  of 
Nyzza  believed  the  resurrection  necessary  because  the  original  con- 
dition of  man  would  thereby  be  restored.  Augustine  taught  that  the 
same  body  will  arise,  although  it  will  be  a  pneumatic  body.  The  sex 
difference  will  continue.  The  children  will  arise  with  the  size  and 
form  of  body  that  they  would  have  possessed  in  case  they  had  lived. 


550  ESCHATOLOGY. 

Pktich  Lo.MUAUi)  said  that  the  bodies  would  arise  with  the  form  that 
they  possessed  jit  thirty  years  of  age.  Thomas  Aquinas  taught  that 
the  resurrected  are  like  men  and  women  in  their  youth.  The  sex  dif- 
ference continues,  but  there  are  no  fleshly  lusts.  The  new  bodies  will 
be  beautiful,  glorious  and  brilliant.  The  bodies  of  the  ungodly  will 
possess  an  unsightly  and  offensive  appearance.  The  resurrection  body 
can  be  touched  as  the  body  of  Christ  and  is  partly  dependent  on  time 
and  space,  but  the  resurrected  are  able  to  move  from  one  place  to  an- 
other with  great  swiftness. 

LiTiiKK  liked  especially  the  figure  used  by  Paul  in  comparing  the 
transformation  of  the  body  to  the  growth  of  the  grain  of  wheat.  The 
resurrection  body  of  the  blessed  will  be  beautiful,  healthy  and  strong. 
After  the  resurrection  we  shall  be  able  to  move  from  one  place  to 
another  with  the  swiftness  of  thought.  Sex  differences  will  continue, 
just  as  different  seed  grains  retain  their  own  nature.  Selnecker  took 
a  peculiar  view  of  the  resurrection.  He  referred  to  Matt.  27:  52  and 
taught  that  the  first  resurrection  took  place  at  the  resurrection  of  the 
Lord  and  that  such  resurrections  take  place  continuously  from  time 
to  time  throughout  the  whole  of  the  New  Testament  dispensation. 
Calovius  set  forth  tliat  the  resurrection  is  not  a  creation,  inasmuch  as 
it  does  not  take  place  out  of  nothing;  the  atoms  of  the  former  body 
are  brought  to  life  again. 

Mautensen,  TnoMASius  and  others  set  forth  the  identity  of  the  resur- 
rection body  w'.'h  the  earthly  body,  so  that  the  same  individuality 
appears,  althouf  a  glorified  and  become  like  unto  Christ.  F^kaxk  refers 
to  Luke  14:  14  Phil.  3:  11;  1  Cor.  15:  23,  24,  and  Rev.  20:  1—6  as 
proofs  that  the  first  resurrection  will  precede  the  general  resurrection. 
The  first  resurrection  is  the  resurrection  of  the  righteous.  He  asks  if 
it  is  necessary  to  prove  that  e^rjcrav  in  Rev.  20;  4  does  not  refer  to  a 
spiritual  but  a  real  resurrection.  He  presents  a  similar  question  with 
regard  to  the  following  words  in  the  fifth  verse:  ol  Xonrol  tcjv  vtKpiov 
ovK  e^rjaav  ap)(L  TeXeaOrJ  to.  ^i'Ata  errj.  Philippi  says  that  the  first 
resurrection  is  th^  ♦ranslation  to  the  blessed  life  in  heaven  which  fol- 
lows after  death.  '  he  words  "and  they  lived"  in  Rev.  20:  4  he  did  not 
consider  as  implyiug  a  bodily  resurrection.  Alfoiu)  interprets  Rev.  20: 
4,  5  in  a  literal  sense.  He  takes  the  position  that  if  the  words,  "The 
rest  of  the  dead  lived  not  until  the  thousand  years  should  be  finished," 
point  to  a  real  resurrection,  then  the  words  in  the  fourth  verse,  "they 
lived,"  must  imply  a  bodily  resurrection.  If  the  first  resurrection  is 
a  spiritual  resurrection,  then  the  second  resurrection  must  be  spiritual 
likewise.  Browx.  on  the  other  hand,  argues  against  the  literal  inter- 
pretation. Among  the  reasons  advanced  may  be  mentioned  the  fol- 
lowing: A  first  resurrection  taking  place  a  thousand  years  before  the 
general  resurrection  is  mentioned  in  but  one  place  in  the  Scriptures. 
If  this  first  resurrection  were  a  real  resurrection,  then  it  would  not  be 


THE    RESUKREOTION.  551 

necessary  to  explain  that  "over  these  the  second  death  hath  no  power." 
No  mention  is  made  of  any  resurrection  in  verses  7 — 10,  which  describe 
the  events  that  take  place  immediately  after  tlie  millennium.  The 
opening  of  the  book  of  life  is  equivalent  to  the  revealing  of  those  whose 
names  are  written  therein,  but  inasmuch  as  the  revealing  of  the  chil- 
dren of  God  occurs  at  their  resurrection,  therefore  the  resurrection 
of  the  believers  must  take  place  simultaneously  with  the  general  resur- 
rection. Verse  4  makes  mention  especially  of  the  martyrs  and  there- 
fore the  bodily  resurrection  of  the  righteous  cannot  be  referred  to. 
Among  American  theologians  who  take  the  position  that  the  first  resur- 
rection will  precede  the  millennium  may  be  mentioned  Seiss.  With 
regard  to  the  martyrs  mentioned  in  verse  4  he  states  that  their  resur- 
rection could  not  have  been  a  spiritual  resurrection,  because  they  were 
already  spiritually  alive.  Their  living  again  signifies  that  they  have 
regained  that  which  was  lost  through  their  martyrdom,  for  which 
reason  a  physical  resurrection  is  implied.  He  states  that  the  expression 
dmoracri?  is  generally  used  throughout  the  whole  of  the  New  Testa- 
ment in  the  sense  of  bodily  resurrection.  He  also  says  that  the  first 
resurrection  does  not  take  place  at  one  time,  but  consists  of  several 
resurrections,  which  occur  at  the  time  of  the  stcond  advent.  All  the 
believers  who  have  died  before  the  coming  of  Christ  have  part  in  the 
first  resurrection.  He  refers  to  Rev.  4,  which  speaks  of  the  elders,  the 
deliverance  of  a  son  ( vlbv  apaa  ) ,  spoken  of  in  Rev.  12,  etc.  Opinions 
are  greatly  divided,  therefore,  on  this  question.  Jacofs*  says  that  the 
bodies  of  the  glorified  "are  not  as  ethereal,  and  un'lke  those  which 
we  have  now,  as  is  often  supposed.  They  are  not  nev'  bodies,  but  the 
very  same  bodies,  only  endowed,  like  our  Lord's  re'surrection  body, 
with  new  properties.  It  is  not  necessary  to  the  identity  of  these  bodies 
with  those  we  now  have  that  the  identity  of  the  atoms  of  matter  of 
which  they  are  composed  be  maintained.  As  the  body  of  the  aged  man 
is  the  same  as  that  which  he  had  in  his  infancy,  while  aV  its  particles 
have  been  repeatedly  changed,  so  with  the  resurrection  body.  The 
requisites  of  identity  in  the  one  case  must  not  be  more  rigid  than  in 
the  other.  The  identity  of  our  bodies  in  the  prest  state  does  not  lie 
even  in  the  succession  of  particles  of  matter,  bu.  in  the  permanent 
impress  which  the  soul  has  made  upon  the  body,  so  that  the  body  cor- 
rectly expresses  the  soul,  and  continues  as  its  organ.  But  while  this  is 
all  that  is  necessary  for  the  preservation  of  identity,  it  is  not  for  us 
to  determine  the  limits  of  God's  omnipotence  in  the  resurrection,  or 
to  say  that  God  will  do  no  more  than  the  very  least  that  is  necessary 
to  maintain  this  identity."  Theologians  generally  express  themselves  in 
the  same  manner  with  regard  to  the  identity  of  the  body.  As  has  been 
stated,  there  has  been  no  real  development  of  the  dogma  during  recent 
times. 

*  Elements  of  Religion,  p.  222. 


652  ESCIIATOLOGY. 

§44.    THE  JUDGMENT. 

The  judgment  takes  place  in  connection  with  the  resur- 
rection. While  the  judgment  will  be  preceded  by  a  judg- 
ment period,  still  this  period  must  end  in  a  decisive  crisis 
or  final  judgment.  The  history  of  the  world  has  been  called 
the  judgment,  and  the  judgments  of  the  last  times  will 
doubtless  set  forth  the  truth  contained  in  this  often  repeated 
assertion,  but  the  present  world's  history  will  at  some  time, 
now  unknown,  be  fully  written.  The  last  judgment  is  not 
to  consist  in  the  mediate  intervention  of  the  Lord  in  the 
affairs  of  men,  but  in  immediate  action  when  the  Lord  shall 
come  in  a  visible  manner  to  judge  the  living  and  the  dead. 

1.    Judgment  Defined. 

The  last  judgment  is  the  act  of  judgment,  both  glorious 
and  terrible,  in  which  the  Triune  God,  through  the  Lord 
Jesus  Christ,  the  God-man,  shall  judge  all  angels  and  men 
in  accordance  ivith  their  spiritual  state  and  their  deeds, 
ivhich  judgment  ivill  bring  eveiiasting  salvation  and  reward 
to  the  righteous  as  ivell  as  eternal  damnation  and  punish- 
ment to  the  wicked. 

The  old  Dogmaticians  called  the  judgment  that  takes 
place  at  death  and  which  is  decisive  with  regard  to  the 
spiritual  state  judicium  particulare  et  occultum,  while  they 
termed  the  final  judgment  universale  et  manifestum.  The 
judgment  implies  in  general  a  confirmation  in  regard  to 
salvation  and  damnation,  inasmuch  as  the  eternal  spiritual 
state  of  the  angels  and  the  resurrected  and  transformed 
saints  of  God  is  already  decided,  while  there  will  be  a  judg- 
ment in  a  double  sense  for  those  still  living  on  the  day  of 
judgment,  a  pronouncement  to  enter  into  the  kingdom  and 
also  rewards  or  a  sentence  to  hell  and  consequent  retribu- 
tion. The  Christians  have  already  passed  out  of  death  into 
life  and  will  not  come  into  judgment  in  the  ordinary  sense, 
which  is  clearly  proven  from  the  fact  that  they  will  have 
part  in  the  resurrection  of  the  just  or  in  their  transforma- 


THK   JlDCi-MENT.  553 

tion,  while  their  salvation,  already  begun,  will  be  contirmed 
and  publicly  declared,  after  which  they  take  possession  of 
the  kingdom.  In  this  connection  compare  the  words  of  our 
Lord:  ''Verily,  verily,  I  say  unto  you.  He  that  heareth  my 
word,  and  believeth  him  that  sent  me,  hath  eternal  life,  and 
Cometh  not  into  judgment,  but  hath  passed  out  of  death 
into  life"  (John  5:  24),  But  even  if  the  state  of  the  resur- 
rected and  transformed  is  decided  and  the  judgment  be- 
comes a  confirmation,  still  in  another  sense  all  will  come 
into  judgment.  The  last  judgment  will  be  a  judgment  of 
works,  Paul  says:  "For  we  must  all  be  made  manifest 
before  the  judgment-seat  of  Christ;  that  each  one  may  re- 
ceive the  things  done  in  the  body,  according  to  what  he 
hath  done,  whether  it  be  good  or  bad"  (2  Cor.  5:  10).  In 
this  respect  the  judgment  is  of  great  significance  also  for 
the  Christians,  determining,  as  it  does,  their  position  in 
heaven.  While  the  Christians  are  saved  by  grace  alone  and 
cannot  glory  in  having  done  more  than  was  their  duty  to 
do,  still  the  Lord  will  not  forget  any  good  deed  done  in  faith, 
but  will  on  the  day  of  judgment  dispense  a  just  reward. 
The  ungodly  will  also  be  dealt  with  according  to  their 
works.  We  would  call  attention  to  the  following  illumi- 
nating passages  of  Scripture :  ''Verily  I  say  unto  you,  that 
ye  who  have  followed  me,  in  the  regeneration  when  the  Son 
of  man  shall  sit  on  the  throne  of  his  glory,  ye  also  shall  sit 
upon  twelve  thrones,  judging  the  twelve  tribes  of  Israel" 
(Matt.  19:  28)  ;  "He  shall  receive  a  hundredfold,  and  shall 
inherit  eternal  life"  (Matt.  19:  29)  ;  "Well  done,  thou  good 
servant :  because  thou  wast  found  faithful  in  a  very  little, 
have  thou  authority  over  ten  cities"  (Luke  19:  77  ff.)  ;  "If 
any  man's  work  abide  which  he  built  thereon,  he  shall  re- 
ceive a  reward.  But  if  any  man's  work  shall  be  burned,  he 
shall  suffer  loss :  but  he  himself  be  saved ;  yet  so  as  through 
fire"  (1  Cor.  3:  14,  15)  ;  "In  due  season  we  shall  reap,  if  we 
faint  not"  (Gal.  6:9);  "For  he  that  doeth  wrong  shall 
receive  again  for  the  wrong  that  he  hath  done :  and  there  is 
no  respect  for  persons"  (Col.  3:  25)  ;  "God  is  not  unright- 
eous to  forget  your  work"   (Heb.  6:  10)  ;  "Behold,  I  come 


554  KSCIIATOI.OGV. 

quickly ;  and  my  reward  is  with  me,  to  render  to  each  man 
according  as  his  work  is"  (Rev.  22 :  12)  ;  compare  also  Matt. 
10:  42;  25:  14—30;  Rom.  2:  9,  10;  2  Tim.  1:  18,  and  espe- 
cially the  two  main  Scripture  passages  on  the  judgment  in 
Matt.  25:  31—46  and  Rev.  20:  12. 

Considering  the  Bible  passages  quoted,  it  is  evident  that 
the  last  judgment  contains  several  acts  and  may  be  dis- 
tributed during  a  judgment  period.  God  does  not  need  to 
hurry.  All  men  shall  be  judged.  As  the  angels  also  shall 
be  judged,  it  must  be  a  special  act,  and  whatever  may  be 
the  order  in  time,  the  judgment  of  angels  will  not  precede 
the  judgment  of  men,  at  least  not  the  judgment  of  saints 
as  to  their  rewards,  because  the  saints  will  participate  in 
the  judgment  of  the  angels.  The  saints  who  are  raised  and 
the  living  translated  with  them  to  meet  the  Lord  in  the  air 
will  not  be  judged  as  to  salvation,  but  according  to  the  pre- 
viously quoted  passages  they  shall  be  judged  according  to 
their  works  in  order  to  receive  by  the  grace  of  God  their 
due  rewards.  Compare  the  following  Bible  passages :  2  Cor. 
5:  10;  Matt.  19:  28,  29;  Luke  19:  13—19,  where  we  read 
concerning  the  faithful  use  of  the  talents  and  the  rewards 
in  ruling  over  five  and  ten  cities ;  1  Cor.  3 :  14,  19,  which 
plainly  teaches  rew^ards  according  to  material  of  building, 
whether  gold,  silver,  etc. ;  Rev.  22 :  12,  "Behold,  I  come 
quickly ;  and  my  reward  is  with  me,  to  render  to  each  man 
according  as  his  work  is,"  etc.  There  is  also  a  judgment 
of  the  living,  the  living  nations.  At  every  morning  service 
we  confess  that  Christ  shall  come  again  to  judge  the  living 
and  the  dead.  Many  commentators  hold  that  Matt.  25:  31 
— 46  describes  principally  the  judgment  of  the  living.  There 
are  evidently  three  parties,  those  on  the  right  side,  those 
on  the  left,  and  "these  my  brethren"  nearer  the  judgment 
throne  which  may  be  those  who  belonged  to  the  first  resur- 
rection and  translation.  During  the  great  tribulation  espe- 
cially there  will  be  many  instances  of  showing  such  love 
and  neglect  of  it  as  Christ  relates  in  this  narrative  of  the 
judgment  of  the  living  nations,  although  such  tests  of  Chris- 
tian character  have  been  made  and  repeated  throughout  the 


THE   JUDGJrENT.  555 

existence  of  the  Church.  To  the  judgment  of  the  living 
belong  also  many  other  events  related  in  the  prophecies,  as, 
Rev.  19 :  11 — 21.  If  there  be  a  millennium,  these  judgments 
will  be  premillennial,  or  going  before.  This  is  clear  from 
Rev.  11 :  15 — 19,  because  it  is  the  time  of  the  seventh  angel, 
when  he  shall  sound  his  trumpet.  Read  especially  the  18th 
verse.  According  to  the  literal,  grammatical  sense  of  Rev. 
20:  11 — 15,  there  will  be  a  judgment  of  the  dead  before 
Him  who  shall  sit  upon  the  white  throne.  The  dead  here 
are,  in  the  first  instance,  those  who  in  the  5th  verse  are 
mentioned  as  "the  rest  of  the  dead."  There  must  also  be 
included  all  those  who  died  during  the  thousand  years, 
among  them  both  saints  and  sinners,  while  "the  rest  of  the 
dead"  in  the  5th  verse  refer  only  to  the  wicked.  In  regard 
to  the  last  judgment  before  the  white  throne  we  quote  Rev. 
20 :  12,  13  and  15 :  "And  I  saw  the  dead,  the  great  and  the 
small,  standing  before  the  throne ;  and  books  were  opened : 
and  another  book  was  opened,  which  is  the  book  of  life :  and 
the  dead  were  judged  out  of  the  things  which  were  written 
in  the  books  according  to  their  works.  And  the  sea  gave 
up  the  dead  that  were  in  it;  and  death  and  Hades  gave  up 
the  dead  that  were  in  them:  and  they  were  judged  every 
man  according  to  their  works.  And  if  any  was  not  found 
written  in  the  book  of  life,  he  was  cast  into  the  lake  of  fire." 
The  dead  from  Hades  were  already  condemned,  their  judg- 
ment was  merely  confirmed  and  their  punishments  were 
determined  according  to  what  was  written  in  the  books. 
We  remember  that  Hades  is  the  intermediate  state  of  un- 
believers or  the  wicked  between  death  and  the  last  judg- 
ment. The  persons  who  were  written  in  the  book  of  life 
entered  the  kingdom  of  God  and  they  stood  before  the  white 
throne  only  to  receive  their  rewards. 

In  the  14th  verse  of  the  same  chapter  it  is  stated  that  at 
the  last  judgment  death  and  Hades  will  be  cast  into  the 
lake  of  fire.  The  last  enemy,  death,  is  then  conquered,  and 
Hades  as  an  intermediate  place  and  state  is  no  longer  needed. 
The  inhabitants  of  Hades  have  been  sentenced  to  Gehenna 
or  the  lake  of  fire.    In.  verses  7 — 10  the  last  act  of  the  devil 


556  ESCHATOLOGY. 

or  Satan  is  described,  before  he  is  sentenced  to  Gehenna, 
and  it  is  stated:  "where  are  also  the  Beast  and  the  False 
Prophet;  and  they  shall  be  tormented  day  and  night  for 
ever  and  ever." 

2.    The  Factors  in  the  Judgment. 

1)  The  subject  of  the  judgment,  i.  e.,  the  one  who  executes 
judgment,  is  the  Triune  God  through  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ. 
Compare  John  5  :  22,  27 ;  Acts  17 :  31 ;  Rom.  2 :  2—11 ;  Heb. 
12:  23.  But  Baier*  points  out  that  Christ  has  assessores 
and  ministri  (assistants  and  servants  at  court),  which 
are  the  saints  and  the  good  angels.  Compare  the  following 
passages:  "Know  ye  not  that  the  saints  shall  judge  the 
world?  Know  ye  not  that  we  shall  judge  angels?"  (1  Cor. 
6:  2,  3)  ;  "And  all  the  angels  with  him"  (Matt.  25:  31)  ; 
"Behold,  the  Lord  came  with  ten  thousand  of  his  holy  ones" 
(Jude  14).  The  fact  that  the  saints  are  to  be  judged  in  a 
certain  sense  proves  that  the  judgment  consists  of  several 
acts.  How  the  saints  are  to  participate  in  the  judgment 
is  not  revealed  in  Scripture.  Baier  says  that  the  saints  are 
to  be  testes  et  comprobatores  and  refers  to  Matt.  19:  28; 
Luke  22 :  30 ;  1  Thess.  4 :  14  and  Rev.  19.  However,  their 
participation  in  the  judgment  would  seem  to  imply  greater 
activity. 

2)  The  object  of  the  judgment,  or  subjectum  quod,  are 
all  men  and  angels.  The  Lord  shall  judge  all  men,  both  the 
living  and  the  dead.  There  is  a  judgment  pronounced  on 
the  living,  in  that  the  believers  at  the  coming  of  the  Lord 
are  transformed  or  clothed  upon  and  caught  up  in  the  clouds 
to  meet  the  Lord  in  the  air,  while  the  others  are  left  behind. 
Compare  1  Cor.  15:  51,  52;  1  Thess.  4:  17;  Luke  17:  34 
— 36.  It  is  also  a  judgment  of  the  dead  who  are  not  im- 
mediately raised  up  at  the  coming  of  the  Lord,  inasmuch 
as  the  resurrection  of  the  righteous  will  precede  the  resur- 
rection of  the  ungodly.  The  angels  will  also  be  judged,  but 
very  probably  only  the  evil  angels,  since  a  judgment  upon 
the  good  angels  would  simply  imply  the  bestowal  of  rewards 

*  Comp.,  Part  I,  Cap.  X,  §VIII. 


THE   JUDGMENT.  557 

and  different  places  of  honor  in  the  kingdom  of  glory.  How- 
ever, the  Scriptures  say  nothing  about  this.  It  is  not  an 
easy  matter  to  explain  the  content  of  1  Cor.  6:  3,  already 
quoted:  "Know  ye  not  that  we  shall  judge  angels?"  If  this 
passage  concerns  the  evil  angels,  then  it  is  perfectly  clear. 
The  evil  angels  are  kept  in  everlasting  bonds  under  dark- 
ness unto  the  judgment  of  the  great  day  (Jude  6). 

3)  The  modus  of  the  judgment.'  With  regard  to  the  mode 
in  which  the  judgment  is  to  be  carried  out  the  old  Dogma- 
ticians  have  set  forth  the  following:  a)  Prieparatio,  which 
consists  in  the  preparatory  acts  of  judgment  and  the  gath- 
ering before  the  judgment  seat.  Many  of  the  events  spoken 
of  in  Revelation  belong  to  this  preparation.  The  gathering 
is  described  in  Matt.  24:  31;  25:  32;  Mark  13:  27;  1  Thess. 
4:  16,  17;  Rev.  20:  12,  13.  b)  Administratio,  which  con- 
si'sts  in  the  investigation,  when  the  accounting  shall  be  made 
and  all  things  revealed.  Of  course,  the  method  of  procedure 
is  not  the  same  as  before  an  earthly  judgment  seat,  since 
the  Judge  is  none  other  than  God,  who  knows  the  hearts  of 
all  men,  together  with  the  history  of  all  nations  and  indi- 
viduals. In  some  way  the  deeds  of  all  shall  be  brought 
before  the  judgment  seat,  Paul  says :  "For  we  shall  all  stand 
before  the  judgment-seat  of  God.  So  then  each  one  of  us 
shall  give  account  of  himself  to  God"  (Rom.  14 :  10  and  12 ; 
cf.  2  Cor.  5  :  10)  .*  In  Matt.  25 :  31—46  the  investigation  is 
detailed  and  the  deeds  of  all  men  revealed.  When  Rev,  20 : 
12  speaks  of  the  opening  of  the  books  and  the  judgment 
according  to  the  works  recorded  in  them,  this  is  not  to  be 
understood  merely  as  a  figurative  expression,  because  even 
if  on  the  great  day  of  judgment  there  may  be  no  ordinary 
books  opened,  still  there  will  be  something  corresponding. 
The  thoughts,  words  and  deeds  of  all  men  are  recorded  in 
a  way  that  corresponds  to  the  conditions  of  the  spiritual 
world.  When  we  contemplate  the  many  inventions  by  means 
of  which  the  spoken  word  of  man  can  be  preserved  for 
generations  to  come,  then  we  can  understand  how  God  can 
preserve  all  the  data   necessary  for  the  judgment.     God 

*  Notice  that  the  noun  (3rjfj.a  is  used  both  in  Rom.  14  and  2  Cor.  5. 


558  ESOIIATOLOGY. 

needs  no  record  books  for  Himself,  inasmuch  as  He  is  om- 
niscient, but  since  He  works  through  means  it  may  be  pos- 
sible for  the  sake  of  His  creatures  that  He  uses  such  means 
as  otherwise  would  be  unnecessary.  It  is  not  probable  that 
the  sins  and  shortcomings  of  the  righteous  will  be  recounted 
in  the  judgment,  although  possibly  everything  may  be  vivid- 
ly called  to  mind.  This  remembrance  is,  however,  not  to  be 
construed  as  a  new  judgment,  since  they  have  been  justified 
and  have  washed  their  robes  and  made  them  white  in  the 
blood  of  the  Lamb.  There  are  many  passages  M^hich  indicate 
that  the  good  deeds  of  the  righteous  will  be  revealed,  and 
when  the  believers  examine  themselves  in  the  light  of  that 
revelation  they  will  be  enabled  better  to  understand  the 
greatness  of  God's  grace  and  holy  love  together  with  their 
own  unworthiness  and  the  eternal  blessedness  of  their  salva- 
tion. The  deeds  of  the  ungodly  will  also  be  made  known 
both  to  themselves  individually  and  publicly,  the  latter  in 
so  far  as  it  is  necessary  to  set  forth  the  righteous  judgment 
of  the  Lord.  God  will  not  simply  leave  them  to  condemna- 
tion. He  will  also  punish  them  in  accordance  with  their 
deeds,  c)  Promidgatio  sententise,  or  the  promulgation  of  the 
sentence.  This  will  be  equivalent  to  a  coyifirmatio  for  the 
resurrected  souls  and  in  a  sense  also  for  the  transformed, 
inasmuch  as  the  judgment  corresponds  to  their  former  state, 
but  the  judgment  will  also  be  a  judicium  retributionis.  The 
Scriptures  do  not  make  specific  mention  of  the  character  of 
the  different  rewards  and  punishments,  but  we  can  be  as- 
sured that  God  will  deal  justly.  The  states  of  eternal  salva- 
tion and  damnation  for  the  godly  and  the  ungodly  are  set 
forth  so  clearly  in  Scripture  that  it  is  unnecessary  for  us  to 
speculate  on  the  details  of  the  rewards  and  the  punishments. 
4)  I'lie  day  of  judgment.  Opinions  are  divided  with  re- 
gard to  the  duration  of  the  judgment,  but  it  is  evident  that 
one  day  will  be  the  last  day  and  one  judgment  the  final  judg- 
ment. Whether  the  judgment  will  be  carried  out  during 
the  course  of  an  ordinary  day  or  take  longer,  it  is  difficult 
to  determine  in  an  absolute  sense.  The  ordinary  interpreta- 
tion combines  the  day  of  the  Lord  and  the  day  of  judgment. 


THE  JUD(5MEXT.  55J> 

But  if  one  of  these  two  expressions  refer  to  a  period,  the 
second  has  the  same  meaning.  The  theologians  who  accept 
the  doctrine  of  a  millennium  after  the  second  advent  say 
that  there  will  be  judgments  both  before  and  after  this 
period,  indeed  some  declare  that  the  whole  period  consti- 
tutes the  day  of  the  Lord.  According  to  these  theologians 
the  final  judgment  will  take  place  after  the  millennium. 
Bring*,  a  Swedish  theologian,  says:  "The  final  judgment 
combined  with  the  resurrection  of  the  dead  and  the  separa- 
tion of  the  blessed  from  the  damned  cannot  take  place  before 
the  tares  and  the  wheat  that  grow  on  the  great  field  of  the 
kingdom  of  God,  viz.,  the  world,  have  grown  to  maturity. 
As  would  appear  from  various  prophecies,  this  final  harvest 
will  be  preceded  by  a  relative  victory  in  the  kingdom  of  God 
on  earth,  growing  out  of  frightful  struggles  between  the 
powers  of  darkness  and  light."  Other  theologians,  who 
hold  this  view,  take  the  position  that  a  judgment  will  take 
place  at  the  coming  of  the  Lord,  when  the  faithful  will  be 
judged  as  well  as  those  then  living,  while  the  judgment 
after  the  millennium  will  be  a  judgment  of  the  ungodly, 
who  will  then  be  raised  up,  and,  of  course,  upon  all  who 
have  lived  during  that  period.  We  have  set  forth  this  view 
in  the  interest  of  completeness.  Whatever  may  be  the 
course  of  events  in  the  days  of  prophetical  fulfillment,  the 
day  of  judgment  will  come  at  the  appointed  time.  Paul 
says:  *'He  hath  appointed  a  day  in  which  he  will  judge  the 
world  in  righteousness"   (Acts  17:  31). 

There  are  many  references  in  the  Bible  to  the  day  of 
Jehovah,  which  is  the  great  day,  when  He  shall  be  revealed 
on  earth.  During  nearly  1900  years  there  has  not  occurred 
any  visible  appearance  of  the  absent  Lord.  The  Church  of 
God  is  waiting  for  the  Redeemer,  who  will  also  be  the  judge 
of  the  world.  But  during  these  years  of  expectancy,  silence 
reigns.  We  experience  the  spiritual  presence  of  God  and 
angels  and  see  their  presence  in  the  efl'ects  of  their  influ- 
ence, and  we  realize  God's  active  nearness  and  work  in  us 
through   the   means   of   grace.     In   the .  Lord's  Supper   we 

*  Den  kristliga  trosläran,  II,  §182. 


&60  KSCHAITH.OGY. 

partake  of  the  body  and  blood  of  our  Saviour.  According 
to  1  Cor.  11:  26  this  Sacrament  is  celebrated  not  only  as  a 
remembrance  of  the  Lord,  but  also  to  remind  us  of  His  re- 
turn. The  signs  are  many  that  the  second  coming  is  not  very 
far  distant.  Lukewarm  Christians  and  the  worldly  people 
dread  the  day  of  the  Lord.  But  the  Bible  chapters  and 
verses  relating  to  the  event  are  so  clear  that  there  is  no 
denying  the  explicit  statements  concerning  the  second  ad- 
vent and  the  judgment  day.  We  have  already  quoted  the 
leading  passages  in  section  42.  Compare  also  the  note  to 
History  of  Dogma  in  the  same  section.  The  Old  Testament 
is  full  of  passages  referring  to  the  great  day  of  Jehovah. 
We  cannot  quote  the  many  pasages ;  if  so,  we  should  begin 
with  Numbers  24 :  17,  concerning  the  "Scepter  out  of  Is- 
rael," or  Deut.  32,  which  Delitzsch  calls  "a  key  to  all  prophe- 
cy." Study  all  the  prophets  and  even  the  five  books  of  the 
Psalms.  Joel  describes  the  day  of  Jehovah  five  times.  Read 
the  vivid  description  or  portraiture  in  3:  17 — 16  and  com- 
pare all  the  parallel  ideas  of  the  other  prophets.  Read  com- 
paratively Isaiah  63:  1—6;  Zech.  1—8;  Rev.  14:  17—20 
and  19:  11 — 21.  Studying  all  the  events  that  are  scheduled 
to  take  place  on  the  Lord's  day,  it  is  evident  that  the  day  of 
Jehovah  is  not  a  day  of  twenty-four  hours.  "For  a  thousand 
years  in  thy  sight  are  but  as  yesterday,  when  it  is  past,  and 
as  a  watch  in  the  night"  (Ps.  90:  4).  The  period  or  seon 
in  which  we  live  is  also  called  man's  day,  and  it  has  lasted 
thousands  of  years.  Compare  also  John  5 :  25,  where  this 
age  is  called  an  hour,  and  that  hour  still  continues.  At  the 
second  advent  the  day  of  man  ends  and  the  Lord's  day  be- 
gins. The  events  on  the  Lord's  day  are  partly  described  in 
Rev.  4 — 21.  Although  the  Lord's  day  is  a  judgment  day 
(1  Thess.  5:  2,  3)  and  a  rule  with  a  rod  of  iron,  we  should 
not  forget  that  it  is  also  a  day  of  consolation  and  restora- 
tion (Acts  3:  19 — 21),  nor  fail  to  notice  the  expression, 
"seasons  of  refreshing  from  the  presence  of  the  Lord"  and 
"the  times  of  restoration."  These  seasons  and  times  imply 
a  period  and  not  an  ordinary  day.  When  the  Lord  returns 
to  realize  the  practical  redemption  and  to  judge  the  world. 


THE   END   OF    THE   WORLD.  561 

the  work  of  restoration,  judging  and  ruling  will  not  be 
executed  in  haste,  but  in  a  manner  which  will  convince 
every  being,  angelic  and  human,  that  God's  mercy  and 
justice  are  immutable  and  in  every  detail  correct. 

3.    The  Object  of  the  Judgment. 

Baier*  says  that  finis  judicii  extremi  is  the  honor  of  the 
divine  wisdom,  power,  goodness  and  retributive  righteous- 
ness. The  day  of  judgment  will  prove  that  the  divine  gov- 
ernment was  all-wise,  that  God's  power  was  almighty,  that 
His  goodness  surpasses  the  thought  of  man  and  that  He 
judges  justly.  The  righteousness  and  justice  of  God  in  all 
His  ways  will  appear  in  the  history  of  the  world,  of  the 
Church,  and  of  every  individual.  —  The  day  of  judgment 
will  also  mark  the  end  of  the  present  world  order,  and  the 
kingdom  of  God  will  be  revealed  as  an  eternal  kingdom  of 
glory,  forever  separated  from  the  kingdom  of  evil.  "Glory 
and  power  belong  to  our  God:  for  true  and  righteous  are 
his  judgments!"  (Rev.  19:  1,  2). 

§45.     THE  END  OF  THE  WORLD. 

When  the  final  judgment  has  taken  place,  then  the  present 
world  both  as  K6<Tixo<i  and  aiwv  in  its  present  form  will  be 
destroyed  and  succeeded  by  new  cosmic  conditions  and  by 
the  ason  of  aeons  or  al^v  twv  atwvwv.  The  earth  and  the 
heavens  will  be  so  completely  changed  by  the  fires  of  de- 
struction and  purification  that  they  will  appear  as  a  new 
earth  and  a  new  heaven.  The  end  of  the  world  is  therefore 
also  the  beginning  of  the  world.  This  will  be  a  new  genesis, 
a  new  paradise,  and  an  eternal  heaven. 

1.    The  Destruction  of  the  World. 

In  the  Scriptures  there  are  three  words  rendered  by 
"world,"  viz.,  y^,  earth,  koo-jxo^,  external  order,  harmony, 
form,  etc.,  but  not  substance,  and    atwv,  meaning  world-age, 

*  Comp.  Theol.,  I,  Cap.  X,  §XVII. 

Dogmatics.     19. 


562  ESCIIATOLOCY. 

a  protracted  period  and  also  eternity.  The  word  aHLv  is  the 
expression  most  generally  used  in  the  Scriptures  to  indicate 
the  end  of  the  world.  When  it  is  stated  in  Matt.  24:  35 
that  "heaven  and  earth  shall  pass  away,"  the  Greek  verb 
■n-apépxoiMai  is  uscd.  This  Verb  means  to  go  past,  to  pass  by, 
to  pass  from  one  place  to  another,  as  a  ship  sailing  from 
one  port  to  another.  It  never  implies  annihilation.  The 
idea  which  it  conveys  is  a  passing  by,  a  change,  a  trans- 
formation. In  this  passage  the  verb  means  that  great 
changes  will  be  wrought  and  an  entire  transformation,  but 
does  not  imply  total  destruction  and  annihilation.  A  com- 
parative study  of  2  Peter  3 :  5,  6  will  shed  light  on  the 
subject.  The  latter  verse  reads :  "By  which  means  the 
world  that  then  was,  being  overflowed  with  water,  per- 
ished." There  the  strong  expression  årr^keTo  is  used,  but 
the  earth  was  not  destroyed  in  the  sense  that  it  was  annihi- 
lated, but  the  whole  human  race  perished  save  those  in  the 
ark.  Another  analogy  may  be  pointed  out  in  the  expres- 
sions which  are  used  in  relation  to  the  renewal  of  man,  e.  g., 
as  in  the  Scripture  passage :  "The  old  things  are  passed 
away;  behold,  they  are  become  new"  (2  Cor.  5:  17).  In 
this  process  man  is  not  annihilated,  he  is  thoroughly 
changed.  The  transformation  in  creation  spoken  of  in 
Matt.  19:  28  is  called  the  regeneration  (TraAiyycvecrta) .  Com- 
pare 2  Peter  3:  10  and  12:  "The  heavens  shall  pass  away 
with  a  great  noise,  and  the  elements  shall  be  dissolved  with 
fervent  heat,  and  the  earth  and  the  works  that  are  therein 
shall  be  burned  up."  In  this  verse  the  verbs  Trapcpxo/xut  and 
Xu(o  are  used.  The  latter  verb  means  to  loose,  to  dissolve, 
etc.  Compare  its  use  in  relation  to  Lazarus  in  John  11 :  44. 
Also  compare  Rom.  8:  20 — 22.  Also  in  this  connection  we 
may  cite  Eccles.  1:4:  "The  earth  abideth  forever."  The 
conclusion  is,  therefore,  that  a  thorough  purification  and 
transformation  shall  take  place  in  the  earth  through  fire. 
An  analogy  may  be  found  in  the  relation  between  the  old 
body  of  man  and  the  resurrection  body.  It  is  a  new  body 
and  yet  it  is  the  old  by  reason  of  the  identity  between  them. 


THE  END  OF   THE   WORLD.  563 

The  earth  and  the  heavens  shall  perish  through  fire,  which 
means  a  transformation  and  not  a  total  annihilation. 

2.    The  Restoration  of  All  Things. 

As  a  man  through  the  regeneration  will  be  restored  to 
his  original  state,  which  will  be  reached  through  the  resur- 
rection and  the  transformation,  so  there  will  be  a  restora- 
tion in  creation.  "For  the  creation  was  subjected  to  vanity, 
not  of  its  own  will,  but  by  reason  of  him  who  subjected  it, 
in  hope  that  the  creation  itself  also  shall  be  delivered  from 
the  bondage  of  corruption  into  the  liberty  of  the  glory  of 
the  children  of  God"  (Rom.  8:  20,  21).  Compare  Rev.  21: 
1,  where  we  read  of  a  new  heaven  and  a  new  earth  as  a 
result  of  the  transformation  through  fire.  The  times  of 
the  restoration  shall  begin  with  the  second  coming  of  our 
Lord.  Compare  the  following :  "And  that  he  may  send  the 
Christ  who  hath  been  appointed  for  you,  even  Jesus :  whom 
the  heaven  must  receive  until  the  times  of  the  restoration 

of    all    things     (xpov^v     aTroKaraorao-ews      ttolvtwv)  ,    whereof    God 

spake  by  the  mouth  of  his  holy  prophets"  (Acts  3 :  20,  21) . 
Note  especially  that  "times"  is  used.  This  restoration  does 
not,  however,  imply  that  all  men  are  to  be  saved,  inasmuch 
as  in  the  world  of  liberty  the  principles  of  freedom  are  in 
effect.  The  ungodly  have  of  their  own  free  will  and  deter- 
mination rejected  the  way  of  salvation.  Therefore,  Ge- 
henna will  remain,  but  Gehenna  and  its  inhabitants  will  not 
serve  as  a  disturbing  factor  in  the  new  world.  The  universe 
is  large  and  Gehenna  will  be  located  in  a  detached  place. 
Even  in  the  intermediate  state  there  was  a  great  gulf  fixed 
between  the  blessed  and  the  ungodly  in  Hades,  and  it  is 
therefore  probable  that  the  gulf  will  be  still  greater  in  the 
eternal  state.  The  restoration  merely  implies  that  God  will 
complete  His  plan  of  salvation  in  relation  to  those  who  will 
constitute  the  new  humanity.  The  new  earth  will  be  a 
paradise  and  the  heavens  will  be  more  brilliant  than  ever. 
The  New  Jerusalem  will  come  down  out  of  the  heaven  from 
God  and  be  located  somewhere  near  the  earth  (Rev.  21 :  10) . 


564  ESCIIAlX)LOGY. 

The  throne  of  God  and  of  the  Lamb  will  be  therein,  and 
from  there  God  will  rule  the  entire  kingdom  of  glory  with 
its  many  mansions  (Rev.  22:  3 — 6). 

3.    Notes  on  the  History  of  Dogma. 

During  the  first  period  the  position  was  taken  that  the 
world  was  to  be  purified  and  transformed  through  fire. 
Generally  it  was  taught,  therefore,  that  the  earth  and  the 
heavens  were  not  to  be  totally  destroyed  in  the  world  con- 
flagration. The  same  moderate  view  was  held  during  the 
Reformation  period.  However,  the  old  Dogmaticians  took 
the  position  that  the  end  of  the  world  meant  a  total  annihi- 
lation. The  newer  Dogmaticians  indeed  teach  the  dissolu- 
tion of  the  world  through  fire,  but  do  not  understand  by  this 
an  annihilation  of  the  very  substance,  but  merely  such  a 
thorough  transformation  as  is  necessary  for  the  new  crea- 
tion. 

Justin  Martyr  speaks  of  a  destruction  through  fire.  Iken.t:us  taught 
that  the  world  would  be  changed  as  to  its  form,  but  the  material  sub- 
stance would  remain.  Tertullian  also  supported  the  theory  of  trans- 
formation. Clement  of  Aleixanuria  held  the  same  view.  Gyprian 
considered  that  the  world  would  finally  grow  old  and  perish  in  the 
seventh  millennium.  Origen  said  that  the  world  conflagration  would 
not  destroy  but  merely  cleanse  the  substance  of  the  created  world. 
However,  he  taught  the  restoration  of  all  things  in  the  sense  that  all 
men  and  even  Satan  would  finally  be  saved. 

Lactantixis  states  that  the  world  would  be  transformed  after  the 
millennium.  Augustine  says  that  the  world  conflagration  would  not 
destroy  the  material  substance,  but  merely  the  form  of  the  elements. 
During  the  conflagration  the  righteous  will  be  preserved  in  the  higher 
regions  or  else  they  will  be  like  unto  the  three  men  in  the  fiery  furnace. 

No  real  development  in  the  dogma  took  place  during  the  Catholic 
Scholastic  period.  It  was  generally  taught  that  the  world  would  be 
destroyed  and  renewed  through  fire. 

Luther  said  the  heavens  and  the  earth  would  be  changed  as  a  gar- 
ment is  cleansed.  The  world  would  then  take  on  a  festive  garb  and 
be  glorified  in  correspondence  with  the  glorified  bodies  of  the  redeemed. 
Gerhard  says  that  the  world  would  be  destroyed  non  per  renovationem 
ac  qualitatum  immutationem,  sed  per  substantialem  abolitionem. 
QuENSTEDT  says  expressly  that  the  world  conflagration  does  not  imply 
a  change,  but  an  annihilation.    Baier  sets  forth  that  the  substance  will 


THE   END   OF    THE   WORLD.  565 

be  totally  destroyed.  Hollazius  defines  as  follows:  "The  end  of  the 
world  is  the  act  of  the  Triune  God,  through  which  by  means  of  fire 
He  will  destroy  and  annihilate  the  whole  fabric  of  heaven  and  earth 
together  with  all  created  things  with  the  exception  of  intelligent  crea- 
tures, to  the  honor  of  His  truth,  power  and  justice,  and  to  the  redemp- 
tion of  the  elect." 

Thomasius  teaches  that  the  world  shall  be  dissolved  by  the  fire  of 
judgment  as  to  its  elements  and  transformed  into  a  new  world  where 
the  new  humanity  will  dwell.  Seiss  states  that  the  destruction  of  the 
world  merely  implies  a  transformation  through  fire  and  not  a  total 
annihilation,  and  that  the  new  earth  must  therefore  be  identical  with 
the  present  earth.  In  accordance  with  Eccles.  1:  4,  he  emphasizes  the 
fact  that  the  earth  will  abide  forever.  He  also  calls  attention  to  the 
promise  of  God  to  Noah  as  contained  in  Gen.  8:  21,  22.  Among  other 
arguments  he  uses  the  following:  The  fact  that  the  earth  and  the 
heaven  fled  away  from  the  face  of  Him  who  sat  upon  the  great  white 
throne  (Rev.  20:  11)  does  not  imply  that  the  material  world  disap- 
peared entirely,  inasmuch  as  later  John  saw  that  the  sea  gave  up  its 
dead,  etc.  Seiss  also  presents  an  unusual  view  in  stating  that  the 
earth  shall  be  inhabited  by  men  just  as  now,  and  does  not  therefore 
teach  that  the  resurrected  and  transformed  shall  dwell  upon  the  new 
earth.  The  latter  will  dwell  in  heaven  and  in  the  new  Jerusalem  and 
from  there  rule  over  the  earth  and  the  heavens.  He  quotes  Eph.  3:  21; 
Joel  3:  20;  Ezek.  37:  25  ff.;  Isa.  65:  17—25  and  Rev.  21:  24.  However, 
he  does  not  explain  how  men  are  to  be  preserved  during  the  world 
conflagration.  Other  American  theologians*  also  declare  that  the  end 
of  the  world  does  not  imply  a  total  annihilation.  This  view  seems  to 
be  the  position  adopted  by  the  majority  of  theologians  both  in  the 
Lutheran  and  the  Reformed  Churches.  —  With  regard  to  the  doctrine 
of  the  restoration  of  all  things  (åiroKaTaaTacn^  twv  irdvTiov)  in  the 
wrong  sense  it  may  be  stated  that  this  view  has  found  defenders  at 
the  close  of  the  Protestant  Scholastic  period  and  also  during  the 
modern  period.  "We  would  mention  Petersen,  Hahn,  Oetinger,  and 
especially  Schleiermacher.  But  confessional  theologians  in  general 
have  taken  the  correct  position  on  this  doctrine,  setting  forth  how  the 
wrong  view  lacks  Scriptural  foundation  and  a  reasonable  basis,  pro- 
vided the  principle  of  freedom  is  to  be  maintained  and  the  demands 
of  divine  justice  are  to  be  satisfied.  If  compassion  would  wish  that 
antinomy  could  cease,  we  may  be  assured  that  God  has  a  deeper  sym- 
pathy than  the  most  tender  human  heart.  When  God  is  absolute  love, 
most  gracious,  merciful  and  just,  we  should  be  satisfied  with  the  ex- 
plicit statements  in  the  Bible  and  not  criticize  the  divine  mercy  and 
justice.     God's  government  is  all-wise. 

*  Jacobs,  Elements  of  Religion,  p.  223.  Weidner,  N.  T.  Theology. 
Vol.  I,  pp.  236—238. 


666  •  E.SCIIAlX)LoGY. 

§46.     ETERNAL  DAMNATION. 

The  final  judgment  is  accompanied  by  an  eternal  separa- 
tion of  the  good  from  the  evil,  which  is  indeed  a  comforting 
thought,  but  at  the  same  time  it  implies  that  the  men  who 
have  rejected  the  means  of  salvation  will  forever  be  cast 
together  with  the  evil  spirits  into  Gehenna,  the  place  pre- 
pared for  the  devil  and  his  angels.  This  is  a  terrifying 
thought  and  a  fearful  reality.  The  necessity  of  such  a  state 
of  damnation  is  to  be  explained  by  the  autonomy  of  the 
relative  personality  in  the  light  of  the  righteousness  of  the 
absolute  personality.  When  God  created  man  in  His  image 
and  endowed  him  with  self-consciousness  and  self-deter- 
mination there  was  indeed  a  certain  risk  that  man  might 
fall, — this  God  could  not  avoid.  But  man  cannot  justly 
regret  the  autonomy  which  freedom  provides,  inasmuch  as 
the  creation  of  the  personality  carried  with  it  inestimable 
privileges  for  time  and  eternity,  if  man  would  but  permit 
his  power  of  self-determination  to  be  moved  by  the  will  of 
God.  God  has  done  everything  that  can  be  done  to  prepare 
the  way  to  eternal  salvation.  Some  have  objected  and 
stated  that  by  reason  of  His  foreknowledge  in  relation  to 
every  individual  God  ought  to  interfere  and  prevent  the 
birth  of  every  person  of  whom  He  knew  that  they  would 
reject  the  means  of  salvation.  But  how  can  we  speak  of 
foreknowing  the  state  and  conditions  of  men  who  have 
never  existed?  This  objection,  furthermore,  presupposes 
a  determinism  and  an  arbitrariness  in  the  divine  essence 
which  do  not  correspond  to  God's  holy  love  and  wisdom. 
If  there  had  been  any  possibility  of  preventing  eternal 
damnation,  the  great  God  of  love  would  certainly  have  in- 
terfered. Apart  from  the  laws  which  rule  in  the  realm  of 
personality,  it  is  impossible  for  God  in  His  almightiness  to 
do  anything  which  would  militate  against  His  righteous- 
ness. 

1.    Eternal  Death. 

Eternal  death  is  the  everlasting  separation  from  God 
together  with  the  loss  of  eternal  life,  hut  implies  an  eternal 


KTERNAL  DAMNATION.  567 

existence  and  suffering  as  a  intnishment.for  sin  and  espe- 
cially unbelief. 

The  following  proofs  are  presented  to  show  that  the  suf- 
ferings are  eternal:  l)The  clear  teachings  of  Scripture. 
It  is  unnecessary  to  recount  the  passages  which  relate  to 
this  matter.  However,  it  may  be  pointed  out  that  Christ 
Himself  has  repeatedly  spoken  of  Gehenna  and  the  eternal 
duration  of  the  suffering  of  the  damned.  Since  we  believe 
that  the  canonical  Scriptures  are  inspired,  the  evidence  is 
quite  sufficient;  2)  the  punitive  righteousness  of  God  can- 
not be  appeased  in  any  other  way  than  the  Scriptures  set 
forth,  and  the  way  of  salvation  was  open  during  the  period 
of  grace;  3)  sin  was  committed  against  the  loving  God, 
whose  goodness  man  despised  by  rejecting  the  means  of 
salvation;  4)  inasmuch  as  man  continued  in  the  evil  of  his 
heart  under  the  best  influences  during  the  period  of  grace, 
it  is  evident  that  with  the  conditions  surrounding  him  in 
Gehenna  there  will  be  no  hope  of  salvation;  5)  because  no 
new  valid  and  just  test  or  trial  can  be  conducted  either  in 
Hades  or  in  Gehenna,  since  the  proper  conditions  are  not 
there  to  be  found;  6)  the  same  expressions  are  used  for 
eternity  both  in  relation  to  salvation  and  damnation.  If 
the  former  is  eternal,  so  must  the  latter  be ;  7)  the  vicarious 
atonement  of  Christ,  when  He  suffered  the  essence  of  the 
eternal  punishments  of  Gehenna  in  dereliction  on  the  cross, 
proved  that  those  who  die  in  unbelief  shall  suffer  the 
eternal  punishments,  because  in  case  the  sufferings  in  hell 
were  limited  to  a  certain  time,  an  aeon  or  several  seons, 
there  had  been  no  necessity  for  Christ  to  experience  the 
pangs  of  hell  to  cover  the  eternal  sufferings  of  mankind. 
If  the  wicked  are  sentenced  only  like  prisoners  in  this  world 
and  given  some  years  of  suffering  in  a  penitentiary,  then 
the  great  suffering  of  Jesus  Christ  would  be  inexplicable. 

The  proofs  are  strengthened  by  reason  of  the  significance 
of  the  Greek  expressions  alwv  and  aiwi/tos.  The  word  alw  is 
derived  from  åu  and  wv,  always  existing.  The  Latin 
aevum  comes  from  ai'wv .  From  sevum  is  derived  seviternus 
and  by  synchope  seternus.     According  to  Aristotle,     uiwv 


568  ESCHATOLOGY. 

means  an  eternal  or  never-ending  existence.  The  word  is 
sometimes  used  in  other  senses,  but  this  is  its  real  meaning. 
The  Septuagint  makes  use  of  aiw  and  aiwi/to?  as  a  transla- 
tion of  the  Hebrew  61am.  Gesenius  says  that  61am  means 
eternity  and  that  its  full  meaning  is  evident  in  such  pas- 
sages as  describe  the  nature  and  existence  of  God.  In  the 
New  Testament  the  word  alwv  occurs  over  a  hundred  times. 
In  the  majority  of  cases  where  it  occurs  it  is  used  with  the 
preposition  cis  to  mean  eternity.  The  plural  form  has  the 
same  significance.  When  alwv  is  used  to  designate  this 
world  the  demonstrative  pronoun  outos  or  the  preposition  cV 
is  used  in  connection  with  the  singular  instead  of  the  plural 
number  of  the  noun.  Compare  the  following  passages 
where  alwv  is  used  in  relation  to  the  everlasting  punish- 
ments :  2  Peter  2 :  17 ;  Jude  13 ;  Rev.  14 :  11 ;  19 :  3 ;  20 :  10. 
Aiwvtos  occurs  about  seventy  times  and  means  never-ceasing, 
everlasting  existence.  With  regard  to  the  eternal  punish- 
ments, compare  the  following  Scripture  passages :  Matt.  18 : 
S;  25:  41;  25:  46;  Mark  3:  29;  2  Thess.  1:9;  Heb.  6:2; 
Jude  7.  Note  especially  these  words  of  the  Lord:  **And 
these  shall  go  away  into  eternal  punishment  (tU  KoXaaivalwvLov), 
but  the  righteous  into  eternal  life  (eis  ^w^v  alwviov)"  (Matt, 
25:  46).  Matt.  12:  32  also  proves  that  the  punishment  is 
eternal :  "It  shall  not  be  forgiven  him,  neither  in  this  world, 

nor  in  that  which  is  to  come  (ovre  iv  tovtw  tw  aiaivt  ovtc  iv  Tw 
/oteAAovrt). " 

Gehenna,  the  place  where  the  eternal  punishment  is  to  be 
endured,  is  mentioned  twelve  times  in  the  New  Testament.* 
It  is  especially  noteworthy  that  Christ  Himself  uses  it 
eleven  times.  It  is  self-evident  that  Christ  would  not  have 
used  the  expression  and  the  severe  utterances  concerning 
eternal  punishments,  if  Gehenna  were  not  a  reality,  to  which 
place  Satan,  the  devils  and  the  wicked  would  be  finally  sen- 
tenced. Christ  as  Son  of  God  knew  the  truth  as  to  the 
future  world.    He  died  to  save  all  who  would  believe  in  Him. 

*Téevva  occurs  in  the  following  passages:  Matt.  5:  29,  30;  10:  28; 
23:  15,  33;  Mark  9:  43,  45;  Luke  12:  5;  Matt.  5:  22;  18:  9;  Mark  9: 
47;  James  3:  6. 


ETERNAL   DAMNATION.  569 

When  we  consider  His  intense  love  and  His  earnest  warn- 
ings, it  is  an  awful  satanic  delusion  by  which  many  are  led 
astray  to  disbelieve  the  plain  teachings  of  the  Word  of  God. 

2.    The  Character  of  the  Eternal  Punishments. 

PoRnse  dmriTiatorum  are  divided  as  follows :  1 )  privativx 
a)  the  loss  of  the  beatific  vision  of  God;  Matt.  22:  13;  25 
41;  b)  separation  from  the  society  of  the  good;  Matt.  8 
12;  25:  46;  c)  exclusion  from  the  heavenly  light  and  rest; 
Matt.  25:  30;  2  Thess.  1:  6,  8,  9;  d)  the  loss  of  all  sym- 
pathy; Isa.  QQ:  24;  Luke  16:  24,  25;  e)  without  any  hope 
of  deliverance  and  therefore  despair;  Luke  16:  25,  26; 
Mark  9:  48;  2)  positive:  A)  internse:  a)  the  indescribable 
anguish  of  soul;  Mark  9:  44,  46,  48;  b)  the  damned  will 
acknowledge  with  their  intellect  the  justice  of  the  divine 
judgment  and  yet  in  their  heart  burn  with  hatred  toward 
God ;  Luke  16 :  25  ;  2  Thess.  1:6;  Matt.  25  :  24 ;  B)  externse, 
which  nevertheless  imply  internal  sufferings;  a)  associa- 
tion with  evil  and  tormenting  spirits ;  Matt.  25 :  41 ;  b) 
association  with  the  damned ;  Rev.  21:8;  c)  a  most  foul 
dwelling  place ;  Matt.  25  :  30 ;  Mark  9  :  43,  47 ;  d)  a  fire  that 
is  never  quenched,  which  burns,  but  does  not  consume ;  Rev. 
14:  10,  11;  20:  15.  If  the  fire  is  not  material  in  the  tem- 
poral sense,  still  there  is  a  real  correspondence.  There  was 
no  other  word  in  human  language  which  could  express  the 
matter.  The  bodies  will  be  pneumatic  and  the  fire  will  cor- 
respond in  nature.  This  fire  may,  however,  be  real  in  a 
deeper  sense  than  we  put  into  the  expression.  What  we 
call  the  spiritual  world  possesses  greater  reality  than  the 
so-called  material  world.  The  pneumatic  bodies  cannot 
perish  as  the  present  material  bodies.  With  regard  to  the 
fire  it  is  stated  that  it  will  not  be  quenched.  Inasmuch  as 
it  is  not  only  the  soul  which  is  cast  into  Gehenna,  but  also 
the  body,  so  the  eternal  punishments  involve  sufferings  not 
only  for  the  soul,  but  also  for  the  body.  Compare  Matt.  5 : 
29,  30 ;  10 :  28 ;  Mark  9 :  47,  48. 


570  ESCHA'TOLOGY. 

3.    Notes  on  the  History  of  Dogma. 

During  the  first  period,  except  for  Origen,  it  was  taught 
that  the  punishments  of  Gehenna  were  eternal.  During 
the  following  period  it  was  likewise  taught  that  the  punish- 
ments were  eternal,  although  there  were  some  who  taught 
differently,  such  as  Gregory  of  Nyzza,  who  held  the  view 
of  Origen,  and  Arnobius,  who  taught  that  the  ungodly  were 
annihilated  after  terrible  sufferings.  The  Scholastics  held 
the  doctrine  of  eternal  punishments,  but  John  Scotus 
Erigena  accepted  the  doctrine  of  Origen  with  regard  to  the 
final  restoration  of  all  things.  The  Reformers  taught  that 
the  punishments  are  eternal.  The  seventeenth  article  of  the 
Augsburg  Confession  sets  forth  that  Christ  will  on  the  last 
day  condemn  the  ungodly  and  the  devils  to  be  tormented 
without  end.  The  doctrine  of  the  Anabaptists  was  con- 
demned. These  taught  that  there  would  be  an  end  of  the 
punishments  of  the  condemned  men  and  devils.  All  con- 
fessional theologians  embrace  the  doctrine  of  eternal  pun- 
ishments. In  modern  times  the  opinions  are  divided. 
Schleiermacher  and  others  reject  the  doctrine  of  eternal 
punishments  in  Gehenna.  There  are  even  sects,  such  as  the 
Universalists,  who  believe  and  confess  that  all  men  will 
finally  be  saved.  The  fact  that  prominent  men  in  different 
denominations  have  defended  the  doctrine  of  at  least  an 
extension  of  the  period  of  grace  after  death,  while  some 
have  expressed  the  hope  that  the  dualism  of  eternity  might 
finally  be  dissolved,  has  led  to  a  more  thorough  investiga- 
tion of  the  meaning  of  the  words  aiwv  and  atwiio?.  Indeed 
the  question  has  been  discussed  in  its  entirety.  The  result 
has  been  the  confirmation  of  the  truth  of  the  old  orthodox 
position. 

Clement  of  Rome  taught  that  there  is  no  room  for  repentance  after 
death.  He  also  taught  that  the  punishments  of  Gehenna  are  eternal. 
Bauxahas  set  forth  the  doctrine  of  eternal  death.  Ignatius  wrote  to 
the  Ephesians  that  whoever  destroyed  faith  by  false  teaching  would 
be  subject  to  the  punishments  of  unquenchable  fire.  Justin  Martyr 
declared  with  great  emphasis  that  the  ungodly  would  be  punished  con- 
tinuously and  be  subjected  to  eternal  torments.    Tatian  also  said  that 


ETERNAL   DAMNATION.  571 

the  punishments  are  eternal.  Iuen.eus  also  emphasized  the  teaching 
that  the  sufferings  of  Gehenna  are  eternal,  and  declared  that  those 
persons  are  without  understanding  who  set  forth  the  divine  goodness 
but  forget  the  judgment.  Tertullian  describes  the  suffering  as  seternse 
pcense  in  an  eternal  fire,  which  burns  the  damned  but  does  not  consume 
them.  Origen  acknowledged  that  the  Scriptures  speak  of  eternal  pun- 
ishment, and  believed  that  God  permitted  the  presentation  of  such  a 
doctrine  in  order  to  terrify  men  and  keep  them  from  sin,  but  he 
rejected  the  doctrine  of  eternal  punishment.  He  also  stated  that  all 
are  not  punished  alike  and  that  the  aim  and  purpose  of  the  punish- 
ments was  repentance.  He  entertained  the  hope  that  even  Satan  would 
finally  be  saved. 

Lactantius  states  that  the  ungodly  after  the  millennium  will  be 
raised  up  unto  everlasting  suffering,  that  their  bodies  will  not  be 
destroyed,  being  unlike  their  former  earthly  bodies,  and  that  they, 
therefore,  will  continue  in  anguish  and  fire  throughout  eternity. 
Athanasius  declared  that  there  was  no  hope  for  the  ungodly  and  that 
they  would  be  consigned  to  the  same  fire  as  the  devil  and  his  angels. 
Chrysostom  states  that  there  will  be  no  end  to  the  sufferings  of 
Gehenna.  Jerome  calls  the  sufferings  seterna  tormenta  and  says  that 
those  who  once  enter  the  place  of  torment  will  never  be  released. 
Augustine  speaks  of  perpetua  mors  and  states  that  there  will  be  no 
end  of  the  sufferings  of  the  damned;  but  he  leaves  the  question  un- 
decided as  to  whether  the  fire  and  the  worm  refer  to  spiritual  or 
physical  torments. 

John  Scotus  Erigena  stated  that  the  state  of  the  damned  is  one  of 
repentance,  but  speaks  of  an  eternal  consciousness  of  sin,  although  he 
taught  that  all  men  would  finally  be  saved.  Thomas  Aquin.\s  believed 
that  the  fire  was  material.  Inasmuch  as  man  had  sinned  against  an 
eternal  God,  therefore  the  punishment  would  be  eternal.  The  intensive 
character  of  the  punishment  is  transformed  into  an  extensive  punish- 
ment. 

Luther  taught  clearly  that  the  punishment  of  the  ungodly  is  eternal. 
He  says  that  the  condemned  will  die  eternally  (ewiglich  sterben)  to- 
gether with  the  devil  and  his  angels.  Farrar  in  England  has  mis- 
interpreted Luther's  view.  The  famous  letter  of  Luther  used  by  Farrar 
deals  with  the  question  as  to  whether  anyone  who  dies  without  faith 
can  be  saved  and  contains  nothing  concerning  the  cessation  of  the 
eternal  punishments.  He  deals  with  the  prospects  of  those  who  in 
this  life  never  had  an  opportunity  of  acquiring  faith  and  sets  forth 
God's  power  to  provide  such  opportunity,  but  he  does  not  say  that 
God  does  so  (aber  dass  er  es  thut,  kann  man  nich  beweisen).  The  old 
Dogmaticians,  of  course,  taught  that  the  punishments  are  eternal. 
Gerhard  and  Quenstedt  said  that  the  fire  was  immaterial  and  that  the 
torments  would  be  in  accordance  with  the  character  of  the  sins.     Hol- 


572  ESCIIA'TOLOGY. 

LAZius  stated  that  the  fire  was  immaterial  and  that  there  were  degrees 
of  suffering.  Pcena  damni  is  alike  for  all,  but  poena  sensus  depends 
upon  the  number  and  character  of  the  sins. 

ScHLKiKKMACHKK  docs  not  accept  the  doctrine  of  eternal  punishments, 
holding  that  as  the  damned  became  accustomed  to  the  torments  the 
poignancy  of  torture  would  be  reduced  or  cease.  He  held  further 
that  pangs  of  conscience  must  imply  reformation,  and  that  the  bliss  of 
the  redeemed  would  be  disturbed  by  the  sufferings  of  the  damned.  He 
supports  the  doctrine  of  the  restoration  of  all  things  and  therefore  also 
the  view  that  all  men  will  finally  be  saved.  In  recent  times  the  doc- 
trine of  annihilation  has  again  made  its  appearance  in  theology.  Some 
accept  a  modified  view  of  the  doctrine,  stating  that  the  ungodly  suffer 
after  death,  but  that  finally  the  fire  of  suffering  destroys  the  sinner 
so  that  he  no  longer  exists.  Some  Adventists  believe  that  the  ungodly 
are  annihilated,  while  others  state  that  they  never  arise  but  remain 
forever  in  the  sleep  of  death.  The  so-called  Evangelical  Adventists 
teach  that  the  ungodly  arise  and  that  they  are  condemned  unto  ever- 
lasting torment.  Ballou,  who  is  called  the  father  of  Universalism 
(although  Relly  and  Murray  were  the  original  founders),  taught  that 
there  will  be  no  suffering  in  the  life  after  this.  They  reject  the  doc- 
trine of  eternal  punishments.  Maurice  in  England  also  rejected  this 
doctrine.  Fakrab  sets  forth  the  hope  of  the  possibility  of  repentance 
after  death.  He  does  not  assume  the  doctrinal  position  of  the  Uni- 
versalists dogmatically,  but  he  rejects  the  doctrine  of  annihilation, 
conditional  immortality  and  purgatory.  However,  he  makes  violent 
attacks  on  the  orthodox  position,  rejects  the  doctrine  of  eternal  suffer- 
ing and  in  fact  accepts  the  universalist  position.  Tliere  have  also  in 
recent  times  arisen  powerful  defenders  of  the  orthodox  view.  Such 
lexicographers  and  exegetes  as  Gesenius,  Cremer,  Meyer,  Alford,  Elli- 
cott  and  others  state  clearly  that  the  doctrine  of  eternal  punishments 
is  based  upon  the  evident  teaching  of  the  Word  of  God.  Many  opinions 
could  be  cited.  Among  theologians  in  Sweden,  M.  Johansson  has 
clearly  proven  that  aiwvios  means  eternity  in  its  fullest  sense.  Just 
as  surely  as  the  blessedness  of  the  faithful  is  unlimited  as  to  time,  so 
surely  is  the  condemnation  of  the  ungodly  unlimited  and  eternal. 


§47.     ETERNAL  SALVATION. 

The  Paradise  of  God  that  was  lost  has  been  regained,  the 
gates  of  the  New  Jerusalem  are  open  to  the  children  of 
God,  and  the  way  has  been  prepared  to  the  tree  of  life  at 
the  river  of  water  of  life.  Joyfully  we  turn  our  eyes  from 
the  outer  darkness  to  the  eternal  world  of  light  and  to  the 


ETERNAL   SALVATION.  573 

many  mansions  of  our  Father  in  heaven.  In  eternity  there 
it  but  one  place  of  darkness,  although  it  has  many  in- 
habitants, while  the  number  of  the  mansions  of  light  is 
greater  than  we  know.  Heaven  is  the  common  name  of  the 
mansions  of  the  blessed.  Of  course,  there  is  a  heaven  where 
God  is  enthroned  and  a  great  city  of  God  to  which  the 
blessed  have  access.  The  kingdom  of  God  is  a  great  king- 
dom, the  kingdom  of  eternal  life.  Human  words  fall  far 
short  of  describing  the  glory  of  the  life  which  is  everlasting. 
The  definitions  and  terms  used  in  Dogmatics  do  not  suffice, 
but  constitute  an  earnest  attempt  to  set  forth  the  final  goal 
to  be  realized  in  the  eternal  kingdom  of  God. 

1.    Eternal  Life. 

Eternal  life  is  the  life  lived  in  communion  with  God, 
finally  realized  not  only  in  an  internal  but  also  in  an  extei'nal 
sense  in  the  greatest  and  most  perfect  fullness  of  life,  ivhich 
the  children  of  God  enjoy  eternally  after  having  received 
their  glorified  bodies  either  through  resurrection  or  trans- 
lation in  the  great  regeneration  and  thereby  admitted  to  the 
land  of  the  living,  where  they  shall  behold  and  serve  God 
eternally. 

The  eternal  life  of  the  Christian  begins  in  the  kingdom 
of  grace  through  regeneration.  The  Christians  therefore 
possess  eternal  life  now,  but  this  new  life  grows  and  de- 
velops gradually  during  our  earthly  life  and  in  the  depar- 
ture at  death  (dvaAwt9)  is  transferred  to  the  Paradise  of 
God,  but  reaches  its  full  fruition  only  in  the  resurrection. 
Compare  John  17:  3;  11:  25;  Phil.  1 :  23 ;  2  Tim.  4:6;  Col. 
3 :  3,  4.  Life  in  its  fullest  sense  is  enjoyed  only  in  the  bles- 
sedness of  eternity,  inasmuch  as  man  will  then  be  restored  to 
himself  as  originally  planned.  There  perfect  harmony  will 
rule  internally  and  externally,  because  the  image  of  God 
will  then  be  perfectly  restored. 

The  old  Dogmaticians,  such  as  Quenstedt  and  others, 
state  that  all  the  redeemed  will  possess  and  enjoy  the  full- 
ness of  life  and  eternal  salvation  and  that  the  difference 


574  ESCIIATOLOGY. 

between  the  saints  will  be  non  essentialis,  sed  accidentalis. 
There  will  be  simply  differences  in  God's  gracious  rewards 
in  accordance  with  His  righteous  judgment.  Quenstedt 
says  that  there  will  be  a  difference  in  relation  to  the  ex- 
ternal glory  and  position  (sessio)  in  the  kingdom.  Com- 
pare Daniel  12 :  2 ;  Matt.  25  :  21 ;  1  Cor.  3  :  14 ;  15 :  41,  42. 

2.    The  Blessings  of  Everlasting  Salvation. 

The  attributes  of  everlasting  salvation  are  divided  as  fol- 
lows: 1)  privativa:  a)  deliverance  from  sin  and  its  conse- 
quences; Eph.  5:  27;  Rev.  19:  8;  21:  4;  b)  deliverance 
from  the  fear  of  death,  for  death  is  no  more;  Isa.  25:  8; 
Hosea  13:  14;  1  Cor.  15:  26;  Rev.  21:  4;  c)  the  absence 
of  the  imperfections  and  distressing  experiences  of  life; 
Rev.  7 :  16,  17 ;  1  Cor.  6 :  13  ;  15  :  43 ;  Rev.  21:4;  2)  positiva: 
A)  inteTma:  a)  the  perfect  enlightenment  of  the  intellect; 
1  Cor.  13:  9,  10;  b)  complete  rectitude  of  the  will;  Eph.  4: 
24;  5:  27;  c)  the  sense  of  security  in  all  eternity;  John  16: 
22;  Rom.  8:  38,  39;  d)  a  spiritual  body  with  heavenly 
properties,  which  is  in  ubi  definitive,  but  can  move  swiftly 
from  place  to  place,  a  body  not  subject  to  suffering,  beauti- 
ful and  indestructible ;  Matt.  22 :  30 ;  13  :  43 ;  Luke  20 :  36 ; 
1  Cor.  15:  44,  47;  Phil.  3 :  21 ;  B)  externa:  a)  association 
with  the  Triune  God;  John  12:  26;  14:  3;  17:  24;  1  Thess. 
4 :  17 ;  Rev.  21 :  3 ;  b)  association  with  the  blessed,  both 
known  and  at  present  unknown;  Matt.  8:  11;  Luke  13:  29; 
Heb.  12:  23;  c)  association  with  angels;  Heb.  12:  22;  d) 
a  most  glorious  abode;  John  14:  2,  3;  Heb.  11:  16;  Rev. 
21 :  27 ;  e)  an  occupation  corresponding  to  the  state  of 
eternal  glory;  Rev.  3 :  11,  12;  3:  21 ;  22:  3—6. 

Viewed  even  from  the  negative  or  the  privative  stand- 
point, eternal  salvation  is  a  most  inexpressibly  blessed  state. 
The  hope  of  complete  deliverance  from  sin  and  all  its  con- 
sequences is  sufficient  to  fill  our  hearts  with  the  greatest 
joy.  When,  in  addition,  we  contemplate  the  positive  bless- 
ings, then  the  heavenly  glory  indeed  surpasses  all  human 
thought.     We  are  not  now  capable  of  comprehending  the 


ETERNAL   SALVATION.  575 

joy  of  life  such  as  it  will  be  experienced  in  a  spiritually  and 
physically  sound  organism  in  the  midst  of  an  environment 
of  perfect  glory  and  with  a  suitable  occupation.  Man  would 
not  be  happy  without  some  occupation.  Therefore  in  eter- 
nity he  will  honor  God,  serve  Him  in  accordance  with  His 
commands,  varied  with  the  constantly  changing  joys  of 
association  with  the  inhabitants  of  heaven,  while  he  is 
privileged  to  contemplate  with  perfect  vision  and  under- 
standing the  miracles  of  God  in  all  the  wide  universe.  The 
Scriptures  do  not  mention  specifically  in  what  the  occupa- 
tion of  the  saints  in  glory  will  consist,  but  state  that  they 
will  glorify  and  serve  God  and  also  that  they  will  rule  with 
Him.  There  is,  however,  no  detailed  explanation  given  of 
the  character  of  this  rule  in  eternity. 

Exegetes  who  hold  that  humanity  will  continue  to  be 
propagated  on  the  new  earth  believe  that  the  saints  shall 
rule  on  the  new  earth.  But  it  is  a  speculation  based  on  the 
repeopling  of  the  earth  after  the  flood  and  also  upon  Rev. 
22 :  2,  where  it  is  stated  in  regard  to  the  tree  of  life :  "And 
the  leaves  of  the  tree  were  for  the  healing  of  the  nations." 
In  such  a  case  Paradise  would  be  restored  on  the  new  earth, 
and  the  people  on  earth  would  in  due  times  be  changed  and 
translated  to  heaven.  Others  hold  the  view  that  the  re- 
deemed will  live  on  the  new  earth.  But  then  the  question 
arises:  Who  will  be  the  subjects,  if  all  the  saints  belong  to 
the  royal  priesthood  ?  Another  question  would  be  presented, 
whether  the  new  earth  as  a  dwelling  place  of  all  the  saved 
would  be  larger  than  the  present.  It  is  stated  in  Rev.  21:1: 
"And  the  sea  is  no  more."  The  renewed  earth  will  probably 
have  the  same  size  as  the  old,  but,  if  there  be  no  oceans,  the 
habitable  earth  will  be  larger.  But  would  the  new  earth  be 
sufficiently  large  as  a  dwelling  place  for  all  the  saved?  If 
the  saints  shall  rule  over  the  angelic  host  in  the  many 
worlds  of  the  universe,  there  will  be  ample  room,  but  the 
old  home,  the  new  earth,  rich  in  memories,  will  often  be 
visited  by  the  saints  who  are  rulers  in  other  spheres  of  the 
universal  kingdom.  The  saints  are  kings  and  the  Lord  is 
King  of  kings.    While  the  full  character  of  the  reign  is  not 


576  ESCHATOLOGY. 

revealed  in  detail,  it  is  clearly  stated  that  the  ruling  saints 
'shall  reign  for  ever  and  ever." 

The  highest  degree  of  blessedness  consists  in  the  com- 
munion and  association  with  God  and  in  the  fulfilling  of 
His  will.  We  must  nevertheless  count  as  one  of  the  most 
blessed  experiences  in  heaven  the  association  with  those 
that  were  near  and  dear  to  us  on  earth,  provided  they  are 
saved,  and  also  with  all  who  are  of  the  household  of  God 
and  the  communion  of  saints.  It  is  not  necessary  to  prove 
that  those  who  knew  each  other  in  the  Church  militant  will 
recognize  each  other  in  the  Church  triumphant ;  this  lies  in 
the  nature  of  the  case.  It  would  almost  seem  that  we  shall 
also  know  saints  with  whom  we  were  unacquainted  on  the 
earth,  perhaps  through  spiritual  intuition.  In  comparing 
Matt.  17 :  3  we  find  that  the  disciples  recognized  Moses  and 
Elias.  When  the  rich  man  in  Hades  lifted  up  his  eyes  he 
recognized  Abraham  afar  off  in  Paradise.  It  is  evident  that 
at  least  relatives  and  friends  will  know  each  other  in  heaven. 
Compare  Matt.  8:  11.  Also  the  following:  "They  may  re- 
ceive you  into  the  eternal  tabernacles — tis  ra?  aiwt'ovs  o-Ki^vas" 
(Luke  16:  9).  But  in  John  14:  2  the  mansions  in  heaven 
are  called  /Aovat  or  permanent  and  solid  buildings.  We  can- 
not now  tell  where  these  heavenly  mansions  are  or  will  be 
located.  According  to  the  promise  of  the  Lord  we  expect 
new  heavens.  There  is  nothing  to  be  gained  by  speculating 
in  a  matter  that  is  beyond  our  power  of  comprehension  and 
discovery,  as  has  been  done,  for  instance,  in  the  conjecture 
that  Paradise  is  located  on  the  star  Alcyone  in  the  Pleiades. 
We  have  made  mention  of  the  fact  that  the  Paradise  of  God 
is  located  in  the  third  heaven,  in  accordance  with  the  words 
of  Paul  in  Cor.  12 :  2 — 4.  In  accordance  with  Rev.  21 :  1,  2, 
however,  the  capital  city  of  the  new  kingdom,  the  New 
Jerusalem,  will  be  located  not  far  from  the  new  earth,  while 
the  kingdom  of  heaven  will  include  all  the  glorious  man- 
sions in  all  the  universe  of  God. 

Although  we  cannot  geographically  locate  Paradise,  where 
the  blessed  now  dwell  during  the  intermediate  state,  it  can- 
not be  a  place  outside  of  the  visible  universe,  considering 


ETERNAL   SALVATION.  577 

that  man,  created  in  the  image  of  God,  lives  on  earth  and 
that  the  Son  of  God  Hved  here  and  shall  return  when  the 
appointed  time  comes.  Still  the  heavenly  land  may  be  far 
away  according  to  human  calculations,  "Thine  eyes  shall 
see  the  king  in  his  beauty:  they  shall  behold  a  land  that 
reacheth  afar"  (in  Hebrew,  the  land  of  far  distance),  Isaiah 
33  :  17.  We  can  never  measure  the  length  of  these  distances. 
No  telescope  has  as  yet  discovered  all  the  stellar  worlds, 
and  probably  never  will.  But  it  is  interesting  to  study  the 
distance  to  the  nearest  stars,  which  proves  that  there  are 
immense  spaces  between  the  solar  systems.  Alpha  Centauri 
is  as  far  as  now  known  the  nearest  star  to  us.  As  it  is  not 
easy  to  calculate  the  distance  in  miles  or  to  make  it  clear 
to  our  understanding,  if  we  say  nearly  twenty-five  million 
millions  of  miles,  astronomers  use  another  unit  in  dealing 
with  the  distance  of  the  so-called  fixed  stars,  namely,  the 
light  year.  If  light  travels  about  185,000  miles  a  second, 
a  ray  of  light  from  Alpha  Centauri  would  not  reach  the 
earth  in  less  than  four  years  and  three  months.  Then  think 
of  the  distance  from  the  next  nearest,  such  as  61  Cygni, 
Sirius  and  ju,  Cassiopeise.  And  then  speculate  or  try  to 
calculate  the  distance  to  Orion,  Polaris,  Pleiades  and  stars 
in  the  Milky  Way.  The  stars  are  to  us  innumerable.  Her- 
schel  examined  only  one  250th  part  of  the  sky.  In  his 
telescope  (magnifying  power  120)  he  estimated  that  in  one 
field  he  had  seen  116,000  stars.  And  at  another  occasion 
he  calculated  that  258,000  stars  had  passed  in  forty-one 
minutes.  Astronomers  have  estimated  by  the  use  of  the 
best  reflectors  that  twenty  millions  of  stars  or  more  have 
passed  in  review.  We  may  be  assured  that  the  many  solar 
systems,  which  roll  and  shine  in  the  empyrean,  are  not 
wasting  their  light  upon  empty  space.  There  are  plenty  of 
homes  in  the  stellar  universe  for  the  great  orders  of  angels : 
thrones,  dominions,  principalities  and  powers.  And  there 
are  and  will  be  many  grand  mansions  in  the  great  heaven 
for  the  children  of  God  or  the  kings  of  and  from  earth. 
When  the  present  universe  is  so  grand  and  magnificent,  who 
can  describe  the  new  or  renewed  heaven  ?    No  pen  can  por- 


578  ESCHATOLOGY. 

tray  the  vistas  of  glory  that  shall  open  before  the  saints 
when  they  take  possession  of  the  kingdom.  This  heavenly 
kingdom  shall  cover  the  whole  universe  with  the  exception 
of  Gehenna.  We  have  already  mentioned  that  the  capital 
shall  be  the  New  Jerusalem.  This  capital  of  the  kingdom 
of  God  is  described  in  Rev.  21 — 22 :  1 — 5.  This  is  the  City 
for  which  Abraham  looked,  the  City  whose  maker  and 
builder  is  God.  It  is  the  City  spoken  of  in  Heb.  11:  16; 
12 :  22 ;  13 :  14.  This  City  is  coming  down  from  heaven  to 
the  vicinity  of  earth  and  is  called,  in  Gal.  4 :  26,  Jerusalem 
which  is  above.  When  it  is  stated  that  the  nations  on  earth 
shall  walk  by  its  light,  it  is  evident  that  the  City  is  over 
them.  This  is  one  of  the  reasons  why  many  commentators 
hold  the  view  that  mankind  shall  continue  to  be  propagated 
on  earth.  But  it  is  also  possible  that  saved  nations  may 
live  on  the  new  earth  or  that  the  saints  may  often  visit  the 
earth.  The  saints  of  God  will  also  visit  the  New  Jerusalem, 
and  many  may  have  their  abode  in  the  capital,  attending  to 
such  duties  as  God  has  commanded  them  to  perform.  The 
New  Jerusalem  will  be  the  great  place  of  assembly.  Al- 
though the  New  Jerusalem  is  a  vast  city,  all  the  saved  will 
not  constantly  live  in  the  capital  of  the  immense  kingdom 
of  God.  If  the  faithful  saints  shall  be  kings  and  rule  in 
different  parts  of  the  kingdom,  this  throws  light  on  the 
statement  that  the  kings  of  the  earth  shall  bring  their  glory 
into  the  New  Jerusalem.  It  is  also  stated:  "And  the  gates 
thereof  shall  in  no  wise  be  shut  by  day"  (for  there  shall  be 
no  night  there),  Rev.  21:  25.  There  may  be  night  on  earth 
and  in  other  parts  of  the  universe.  The  sun,  moon  and  stars 
will  shine.  But  the  new  earth  will  also  have  light  from  the 
New  Jerusalem.  The  nearness  of  the  glory  of  God  shall  be 
as  the  brightest  sun.  The  new  heaven  with  its  solar  systems 
and  stars  will  shine  more  brilliantly  than  the  old.  And  in 
the  City  of  God  there  is  no  need  of  a  sun.  The  New  Jerusa- 
lem is  a  large  city,  when  we  consider  that  the  length,  the 
breadth  and  height  thereof  are  equal,  twelve  thousand  fur- 
longs. If  the  height  is  1500  miles,  and  if  the  main  avenues 
were  a  mile  above  each  other,  the  magnitude  would  be  stu- 


ETERNAL  SALVATION.  579 

pendous.  Notice  that  the  wall  is  144  cubits  ''according  to 
the  measure  of  a  man,  that  is,  of  an  angel."  Think  of  the 
City  towering  high  above  the  great  wall !  And  look  at  the 
foundations,  the  gates  and  the  wall  with  the  precious  stones 
in  different  brilliant  colors !  No  human  pen  can  describe 
heaven.  ''Things  which  eye  saw  not,  and  ear  heard  not,  and 
which  entered  not  into  the  heart  of  man,  whatsoever  things 
God  prepared  for  them  that  love  him"  (1  Cor.  2:9). 

Inasmuch  as  finis  beatitudinis  humanas,  to  use  once  more 
an  old  dogmatic  expression,  is  the  honor  of  the  divine  good- 
ness, wisdom,  fidelity  and  power,  so  shall  the  glorious  praise 
of  the  multitudes  of  the  redeemed  sound  before  the  throne 
of  God  and  the  Lamb :  "Unto  him  that  sitteth  on  the  throne, 
and  unto  the  Lamb,  be  the,  blessing,  and  the  honor,  and  the 
glory,  and  the  dominion,  for  ever  and  ever!"  (Rev.  5:  13). 


INDEX 


Abaddon,  489. 

Abomination  of  desolation,  515. 

Abelard,  Proof  of  God's  existence,  24. 

Omnipotentia,  56. 

Trinity,  82. 

Original  sin,  170. 

Reconciliation,  278. 

Inspiration,  401. 
Abimelech,  Impeditio,  121. 
Absolute  Personality,  35. 

formal    and   material    elements, 
35. 

conception  of,  36. 

attributes,  47. 

relation  to  the  world,  47,  48. 

essential  characteristics,  48,  49. 
"AjSuo-o-os,  138,  489. 
Acceptation    theory    of    Atonement, 

279 
Acts  2:   27,  31,  p.  488. 

2:   31,  p.  239. 

3:  20,  21,  p.  563. 

3:   21,  p.  244. 

8:   9—22,  p.  423. 

10:  48,  p.  425. 

13:  2,  p.  67. 

13:  48,  p.  94. 

17:  26,  p.  146. 

26:   17,  18,  p.  300. 
Actual  sins,  characterization,  173. 

classification,  175. 

effects,  179. 
Actus  personales,  Trinity,  72  sq. 
AStacrraTot,  212. 

Adminicula  in  illumination,  309. 
Administratio  in  judgment,  557. 
Adoptionism,  God-man,  207. 
Adspiratio,  394. 
Advent,  second,  522. 
Adventists,  572. 
^gidius  Hunnius,  Freedom  of  will, 

188. 
^pin,  Descent  into  hell,  246. 
-(Eternitas,  50. 
.^tius,  Trinity,  79. 


^vum,  128. 

Africanus,  Julius,  Unity  of  God,  44. 
Agazziz  on  Darwinism,  109. 
Kyvorjixa,  175. 

Agobard  of  Lyons,  Inspiration,  401. 
Agricola,  Concio   pcenitentise,  411. 
^'AiSt;?,  488. 
Atwv,  567,  568,  570. 
Attovios,  567,  568,  570. 
Albert  the  Great,  God's  being,  43. 
Alcazar,  Second  advent,  536. 
Alcuin,  Trinity,  81. 

Predestination,  98. 
Alcyone,  576. 
Alexander  of  Hales,  Trinity,  82. 

Image  of  God,  160. 

Freedom  of  will,  187. 

Atonement,  279. 

Sacraments,  418. 
Alford,  Lord's  Supper,  449. 

Resurrection,  550. 

Eternal  damnation,  572. 
Alloeosis,  226. 

Almanac  of  prophecy,  520. 
Alogians,  God-man,  202. 
Alpha  Centauri,  577. 
Amalrik  of  Bena,  504. 
AfxdpTrjfJia,  174. 
AfjuapTLa,  174. 
Ambrose,  Original  sin,  170. 

Freedom  of  will,  186. 

Reconciliation,  277. 

Justification,  337. 

Lord's  Supper,  464. 

Resurrection,  549. 
Amicitia  specialis,  61. 
Amor,  49. 

complacentia,  61. 

benevolentia,  61. 

amicitia,  61. 
Amsdorf,  Renovation,  359. 
Amyraldism,   101. 
Anabaptists,  Baptism,  439. 

Ministry,  479. 


582 


INDEX. 


Anabaptists,   Chiliasm,    530. 
Eternal  damnation,  570. 
AvaAuo-ts,  573. 
Ava(TTa(rts.   551. 

Anaxagoras,  God's  existence,  26. 
^ Avcvépyrjra,  220. 
Angels,  126  sqq. 
the  good,  128. 

attributes,  128. 
abode  and  degrees,  129. 
occupation,  131. 
objects  of  activities,  133. 
the  evil,  135  sqq. 
condition,   136. 
attributes,  137. 
habitat  and  gradation,  138. 
occupation,  138. 
punishment,  141. 
Anglican  Church,  Ministry,  479. 
AvoyLita,    175. 

Anselm,  God's  existence,  22. 
Being  of  God,  43. 
Unity  of  God,  44. 
.<5]ternitas,  50. 
Trinity,  81. 
Predestination,  98. 
Evil  angels,  142. 
Propagation  of  soul,  153. 
Original  sin,  170. 
Freedom  of  will,  186. 
God-man,  207. 
Atonement,  278. 
Conversion,  324. 
Justification,   337. 
Lord's  Supper,  465. 
Anthropology,  144  sqq. 
Antichrist,  534. 
Antichristianity,  503. 
'AvTtSocrts.  217. 
Antinomianism,  411,  412. 
Anti-Scriptural  views  on  powers  of 
evil, 
Dualism, 
Hylism, 
Parseism, 

Personfication  theory,  135. 
Anti-Theistic  theories, 
Acosmism,  39. 
Pantheism,  39. 
Atheism,  40. 
Materialism,  41. 
Positivism,  41. 
AwTToaTacTLa^   198. 
'  AiroBi.Kifx.a(Tia^   95. 


AiroKUTacTTacn^  tui/  Trai^rwi/,   565. 
Apocalypse  of  Isaiah,  539. 
Apollinaris,  God-man,  205. 
Apology,  Justification,  338. 
Regeneration,  345. 
Membership  of  unbelievers,  381. 
Baptism,  439. 
ATToAvrpwo-ts,  260. 
ATToaracrca,  505. 
Apostolic  Succession  in  State  Church 

of  Sweden,  482. 
ATToreAeor/Aa,  225. 

Aquinas,    Thomas,    God's   existence, 
25. 

Unity  of  God,  43,  44. 

Divine  attributes,  45,  50,  54. 

Trinity,  82. 

Predestination,  98. 

Creation,  112. 

Miracles,  126. 

Angels,  134. 

Propagation  of  soul,  153. 

Image  of  God,  160. 

Original  sin,  170. 

Freedom  of  will,   187. 

God-man,  207. 

Descent  into  hell,  246. 

Atonement,  279. 

Conversion,  324. 

Justification,  338. 

Church,  380. 

Inspiration,  401. 

Baptism,  438. 

Lord's  Supper,  465. 

Ministry,  478. 

Purgatory,  498. 

Resurrection,  550. 

Eternal  damnation,  571. 
Aquitanus,   Prosper,   God's   will,   56. 

Predestination,  98. 
Arguments     against     Postmillenni- 

alism,  531. 
Argumentum,  a  tuto,  21. 

ab  utili,  21. 

a  conscientia,  24. 

morale,  24. 
Aristotle,  God's  existence,  25,  26. 
Arius,  Being  of  God,  42. 

Trinity,  79. 

God-man,  205. 
Arminians,  Trinity,  83. 

Predestination,   101. 

Propagation  of  soul,  153. 

Image  of  God,  160. 

Original  sin,  172. 


583 


Arminians,  Freedom  of  will,  188. 

God-man,  208. 

Reconciliation,  281. 

Justification,  340. 

Inspiration,  402. 

Means  of  grace,  412. 

Sacraments,  420. 

Baptism,  440. 

Lord's  Supper,  467. 
Arnauld,  Predestination,  101. 
Arnobius,  Natural  revelation,  29. 

Propagation  of  soul,  153. 

God-man,  205. 

Eternal  damnation,  570. 
Artaxerxes  Longimanus,  510. 
Artemon,  Trinity,  78. 

God-man,  202. 
Ascensus  in  ccelum,  243. 
'Aa-i^cia,  174. 

Askusnagus,   John,  Trinity,   81. 
Athanasius,  God's  existence,  27. 

Being  of  God,  43. 

Trinity,  80. 

Creation,  112. 

Original  sin,  169. 

God-man,  205. 

Reconciliation,  277. 

Eternal  damnation,  571. 
Athenagoras,  Evil  angels,  142. 

God-man,  202. 

Inspiration,  401. 
Atonement,  necessity,  257. 

subject,  259. 

concept,  260. 

attributes,  267. 

object,  269. 

effects,  271. 
Auberlen,  Second  advent,  537. 
Audians,  Image  of  God,  159. 
Augsburg    Confession,    Freedom    of 
will,  179. 

Repentance,  315. 

Justification,  338. 

God's    relation   to   means    of 
grace,  385. 

Effect  of  means  of  grace,  386. 

Pcenitentia,  411. 

Baptism,  439. 

Lord's  Supper,  452. 

Ministry,  472. 

Chiliasm,  529,  530. 

Eternal  damnation,  570. 
Augustana  Synod,  Ministry,  481. 
Augustine,  God's  existence,  25,  43. 

Unity  of  God,  44. 

Divine  attributes,  45. 


Augustine,  v5i]ternitas,  50. 

Omniprsesentia,  54. 

Trinity,  80. 

Predestination,  97. 

Creation,  112. 

Miracles,  126. 

Angels,  134. 

Propagation  of  soul.  153. 

Original  sin,  170. 

Freedom  of  will,  186. 

God-man,  205. 

Descent  into  hell,   246. 

Reconciliation,  277. 

Conversion,  324. 

Justification,   337. 

Church,  380r 

Inspiration,  401. 

Word  as  means  of  grace,  411. 

Sacraments,  418. 

Baptism,  438. 

Ministry,  478. 

Death  and    Intermediate    State, 
498. 

Antichrist,  504. 

Second  advent,  536. 

Resurrection,  549. 

End  of  w^orld,  564. 

Eternal  damnation,  571. 
Authority  of  Holy  Scripture,  387. 
Autochthones,  146. 

Babylon,  the  Great,  517. 

Bacon  of  Verulam,  God's  existence, 

27. 
Bahr,  Reconciliation,  283. 

Symbolic  theory  of  atonement, 
283. 
Baier,  Divine  attributes,  47. 

Immensitas,  51. 

Immutabilitas,   51. 

Sanctitas,  59. 

Veracitas,  60. 

Baptism,  421. 

Ministry,  470. 

End  of  world,  564. 
Baius,  Michael,  Predestination,  100. 
Balaam,  Num.  22:   12,  121. 
Ballou,  Eternal  punishments,  572. 
Baptism,  Definition,  420,  421. 

necessity,  422. 

elements,  424. 

mode,  425. 

subjects,   428. 

infant,  428  sq. 

effect  and  purpose. 

regeneration  in,  432. 


584 


Baptism,    pouring,    sprinkling    and 

immersion,  435. 
BaTTTL^w    425. 
BaTTTo),  425. 
Barnabas,  Baptism,  437. 

God-man,  202. 

Second  advent,  536. 

End  of  the  world,  570. 
Basil  of  Ancyra,  Trinity,  80. 

God-man,  205. 
Basil  the  Great,  Trinity,  80. 

Predestination,  97. 

Original  sin,  170. 

Baptism,  438. 

Lord's  Supper,?  464. 
Basilides,  Gnosticism,  203. 
Beck,  Propagation  of  soul,  153. 

Justification,  340. 
Beckman,  Reconciliation,  284. 
Bellarmin,  Image  of  God,  160. 

Original  sin,  171. 

Freedom  of  will,  187. 

Faith,  325. 

Church,  380. 

Tradition,  402. 

Purgatory,  498. 
Benevolentia,  Gl. 

Benevolentia  Dei  universalis,  85,  86. 
Bengel,  Lord's  Supper,  449. 

Second  advent,   537. 
Berenger,   Lord's  Supper,   465. 
Bernhard   of   Clairvaux,  Reconcilia- 
tion, 279. 

Justification,  338. 
Beryllus,  Trinity,  79. 

God-man,  203. 
Beza,  Descent  into  hell,  246. 

Baptism,  440. 
Biel,  Gabriel,  Freedom  of  will,  187. 

Atonement,  279. 

Sacraments,  418. 

Lord's  Supper,  465. 
Billing,  Justification  and  Regenera- 
tion, 345. 

Efficacy  of  Word,  413. 

Lord's   Supper,   468. 
Björling,  God's  being,  34. 

Unity  of  God,  44. 

Divine  attributes,  47. 

Immutabilitas,  51. 

Incarnation,  193. 

Intermediate  state,  499. 
Blessings    of    everlasting    salvation. 

574  sqq. 
Blood,  Circulation  of,  Harvey,  148. 


Boethius,  Divine  attributes,  50. 

Fallen  angels,  142. 
Böhme,  Pantheism,  42. 

Trinity,  83. 

Creation,  113. 
Bona  opera,  358. 
Bonaventura,  Image  of  God,  160. 

Justification,  338. 
Boström,    Influence    of   his   philoso- 
phy, 382. 
Bradwardine,    Thomas,    Predestina- 
tion, 99. 
Brentz,  Two  States  of  Christ,  247. 

Reconciliation,   280. 
Bring,  Church,  382. 

Baptism,  440. 

Lord's  Supper,  468. 

Second  advent,  537. 

Final  judgment,  559. 
Brown,  Resurrection,   550. 
Bruno,  Modern  Pantheism,  40. 
Bucer,  Descent  into  hell,  246. 
Buddseus,  Freedom  of  will,  188. 
Bushnell,   The  moral  theory  of 
atonement,  283. 

Csesarius    of   Aries,    Predestination, 

98. 
Calixtus,  Propagation  of  soul,  153. 

Inspiration,  403. 

Intermediate  State,  499. 
Calovius,  Natural  Revelation,  30. 

Unity  of  God,  44. 

Gubernatio,  119. 

Image  of  God,  160. 

State  of  humiliation,  248. 

Inspiration,  403. 

Baptism,  440. 

Resurrection,  550. 
Calvin,  God's  will,  56. 

Predestination,  99. 

God-man,  208. 

Descent  into  hell,  246. 

Reconciliation,  280. 

Justification,  339. 

Church,  381. 

Inspiration,  402. 

Sacraments,  420. 

Baptism,   439. 

Lord's  Supper,  466. 

Ministry,  479. 
Calvinists,  Baptism,  439. 
Cassianus,  Predestination,  97. 
Cassiopeife,  577. 
Causa  finalis,  26. 
Casualism,  115. 


585 


Cerinthus,  202. 

Channing,  W.  E.,  Unitarianism,  84. 
Xapts,   295. 

Chemnitz,  State  of  humiliation,  247. 
Conversion,  312. 
Inspiration,  403. 
Chiliasm,  530. 
Xp^o-is,  220. 
Christ,  divinity  of,  195. 
liumanity  of,  196. 
offices, 

prophetic,  252. 
sacerdotal,  256. 
regal,  285. 
teacher,  253. 
prophet,  254. 
worker  of  miracles,  254. 
high  priest,  256,  273. 
king,  286. 
Christianity,  general  spread  of,  501. 
Christology,  189  sqq. 
Chrysostom,  God's  will,  56. 
Predestination,  97. 
Freedom  of  will,  186. 
Conversion,  313. 
Reconciliation,  277. 
Word  as  a  means  of  grace,  411. 
Ministry,  478. 

Supplication  of  the  saints,  498. 
Antichrist,  504. 
Eternal  damnation,  571. 
Church,  366  sqq. 

ecclesia  stricte  dicta,  367. 
ecclesia  late  dicta,  367,  368. 
founder  and  head,  370. 
Matt.  16:  18,  p.  370,  371. 
materia  et  forma  ecclesia,  371. 
attributes,  372. 
una,  372. 
sancta,  372. 
catholica,  372. 
apostolica,  373. 
visibilis  et  invisibilis,  373. 
universalis    et    particularis, 

373. 
pura  et  vera,  374. 
synthetica  sive  collectiva  et 

representativa,    375. 
militans  et  triumphans,  375. 
aim  and  purpose,  377. 
Cicero,  God's  existence,  24,  25. 
Clarke,   James  Freeman,  Unitarian- 
ism, 84. 
Clement    of    Alexandria,    God's    ex- 
istence, 25. 
Natural  Revelation,  29. 


Clement  of  Alexandria,  Comprehen- 
sibility  of  God,  42. 

Miracles,  125. 

Evil  angels,  142. 

Propagation  of  soul,  153. 

Image  of  God,  159. 

Original  sin,  169. 

Freedom  of  will,  185. 

States  of  Christ,  246. 

Conversion,  323. 

Justification,  337. 

Church,  379. 

Word  as  a  means  of  grace,  411. 

Baptism,  437. 

Intermediate  State,  498. 

End  of  world,  564. 
Clement  of  Rome,  Trinity,  78. 

God-man,  202. 

Reconciliation,  276. 

Conversion,  323. 

Justification,  337. 

Church,  379. 

Inspiration,  401. 

Ministry,  477. 

Resurrection,  549. 

Eternal  damnation,  570. 
Clement  XI.,  Predestination,  101. 
Coadamites,  146. 
Coelum  physicum, 

angelorum  et  beatorum, 

Dei  majestaticum,   110. 
Cognitio  insita,  28. 
Cognitio  acquisita,  30. 
Col.  1:   23,  p.  501. 

2:   9,  p.  211. 
Communion  of  natures,  211. 
Communio  impiorum,  458. 
Communicatio  idiomatum,  215. 
Communication  of  attributes,  219. 
Communio   seu   sumtio   in   Lord's 

Supper,  443. 
Compensative  theory  of  Reconcilia- 
tion, 282. 
Complacentia,  61. 
Comte,  Auguste,  Positivism,  41. 
Conception  by  the  Holy  host,  194. 
Concio  pcenitenti£B,  411. 
Concio  plena  consolationis,  411. 
Concretum  naturae,  213. 
Concupiscentia,  164. 
Concursus,  117. 

in  evil  actions,  118. 
Concomitantia,  466. 
Conjugium,  376. 
Conscientia,  antecedens,  29. 
concomitans,  29. 


>86 


INOEX. 


Conscientia,  subsequens,  29. 
Consecratio  in  Lord's  Supper,  442. 
Conservation,  362. 

means  and  manner,  364. 

goal,  365. 
Conservation   in   Providence,   116, 

117. 
Consilia  evangelica,  358. 
Consubstantiation,  445. 
Contents  of  Law  and  Gospel,  407. 
Contrition,  definition,  314,  315. 

marks,  315. 

object,  317. 

effects,  317. 
Conversion,    definition    and    charac- 
teristics, 311. 

starting  point,  312. 

factors,  312. 

object,  314. 
Conversion  and  Election,  Dr.  Pieper 
on.  103. 

1  Cor.  1:  30.  p.  251. 

3:   12—15,  p.  360. 
10:  1,  2,  p.  428. 
11:  24,  p.  443. 
11:   30,  32,  p.  461. 
15:    35—38,  p.  545. 

2  Cor.  5:  2—4,  p.  528. 

6:   14—18,  p.  375. 
12:   2—4,  p.  576. 
Cosmological    proof   of   God's   exist- 
ence, 25. 
Council  of  Trent,  Freedom  of  will. 
187. 
Conversion,  324. 
Justification,  338. 
Good  works,  358. 
•      Tradition,  402. 
Ministry,  479. 
Death  and  purgatory,  498. 
Creation.  103  sqq. 
modus,  105. 
in  Genesis,  106. 
Laplace  on,  108. 
Various  theories. 
Emanation, 
Hylozoism, 
Materialism, 
Evolution,  109. 
Haeckel  on,  109. 
Agazziz  on,  109. 
Virchow  on,  109. 
effects,  110. 
objects,  110. 
Creation  of  man,  145. 
Theories,  145. 


Creation  of  man,  theories, 
Preadamites,  146. 
Coadamites,  146. 
Autochthones,   146. 
Transmutation,  146. 
Creationism,  149. 
Credere  Deum,  etc.,  320. 
Cremer,  Eternal  damnation,  572. 
Cygni,  577. 
Cyprian,  God's  existence,  25. 

Causes  of  evil,  126. 

Miracles,  126. 

Original  sin,  169. 

Freedom  of  will,  186. 

Sacerdotal  office,  277. 

Conversion,  323. 

Church,  379. 

Sacraments,  418. 

Baptism,  437. 

Lord's  Supper,  464. 

Ministry,  477. 

End  of  the  world,  564. 
Cyril  of  Alexandria,  Image  of  God, 
160. 

God-man,  206. 

Sacerdotal  oflSce,  278. 
Cyril  of  Jerusalem,  Trinity,  80. 

Predestination,  97. 

Original  sin,  170. 

Freedom  of  will,  186. 

Baptism,  438. 

Lord's  Supper,  464. 

Damianus,  Trinity,  81. 
Damnation,  566. 
Daniel  5:   21,  p.  426. 

9:   21—23,  p.  490. 

9:  27,  p.  515. 

10:   13,  p.  140. 

11:    36—45,  p.  506. 

12:    6—12,  p.  511. 
Dannhauer,  Inspiration,  403. 

Baptism,  440. 
Darwin,  Modern  Materialism,  41. 

Creation,  113. 
Das  Lukas-legende,  392. 
Daub,  Evil  angels,  142. 

Inspiration,  403. 
Day  of  judgment,  558. 
Dead  in  relation  to  the  living,  495. 
Death,  definition  of,  484. 

intermediate  state,   484  sqq. 

eternal,  566. 
Decisio  Saxonia,  248. 

inspiraton,  403. 
Deism,  incarnation,  192. 


587 


Deists,  Supernatural  revelation,  31. 
Delitzsch,  Unity  of  God,  44. 

Angels,  135. 

Propagation  of  soul,  153,  154. 

Relation  of  spirit,  soul  and 
body,  154. 

Church,  382. 
Democritus,     Ancient     Materialism, 

41. 
Denk,  Trinity,  83. 

Atonement,  275. 
Derelictio,  281. 

Descartes,  God's  existence,  22,  23. 
Descensus  ad  inferos,  240. 
De  servo  arbitrio,  44. 
Determinatio  in  divine  government, 

120,  121. 
De  Wette,  Angels,  134. 

God-man,  209. 

Inspiration,  403. 
Ae^ao-6'at,  Acts  3:   21,  p.  244. 
Dichotomy,  147. 
AtSax>;,  Baptism,  437. 

Ministry,  477. 
Diodorus  of  Tarsus,  God-man,  205. 
AiotKr^o-ts,  114. 

Dionysius  of  Alexandria,  Trinity,  79. 

Dionysius   the  Areopagite,   Compre- 

hensibility  of  God,  42. 

Trinity,  81. 

Angels,  133. 
Dionysius  of  Rome,  Trinity,  79. 
Directio  in  divine  government,  120, 

121. 
Distinctio  rationis  ratiocinantis,  45 
Distinctio  rationis  ratiocinatse,  45. 
Distributio  in  Lord's  Supper,  443. 
Divine  attributes,  44  sqq. 

subjectivity  and  objectivity,  45. 

knowledge  of,  46. 

via  negationis,  46. 
via  causalitatis,  46. 
via  eminentiae,  47. 

divisions  of,  47,  48. 

essential  characteristics,  48. 
life,  vita, 
light,  lux, 
love,  amor,  47,  48. 

special,  50. 

relative,  53. 

immanent,  50,  59. 
Divinity  of  Jesus,  195. 
Docetism,  206. 
Dogma,  history  of,  17. 

periods,  18, 


Dogmatics,  17. 

Donatists,  Church,  380. 

Donum  superadditum,  157,  159,  160. 

Dorner,  Incarnation,  250. 

Christian  certainty,  354. 
Dualism,  135. 
Auva/xts,  123. 

Duns    Scotus,   Comprehensibility   of 
God,  42. 

Unity  of  God,  44. 

God's  will,  56. 

Predestination,   99. 

Image  of  God,  160. 

Original  sin,  171. 

Predom  of  will,  187. 

God-man,  207. 

Descent  into  hell,  246. 

Atonement,  279. 

Sacraments,  418. 

Baptism,  438. 
Durandus  of  Pourcain,  Original  sin, 

171. 
Dynamic  theory  of  inspiration,  400. 

401. 
Dynamic  theory   of   Lord's   Supper, 

446. 
Dynamists,  Trinity,  78. 

Christology,  202. 

Earthly  elements  in  Lord's  Supper, 

456. 
Ebionites,  Trinity,  78. 
Ecclesia,  367  sqq. 

stricte  dicta,  367. 

late  dicta,  367,  368. 

attributes,  372  sq. 
Ecclesiology,  366  sqq. 
Eckhart,  Master,  Trinity,  82. 
Economical  Trinity,  76. 
Effectus  evangelii,  409. 
Effectus  legis,  408,  409. 
Efficacy  of  the  Word  of  God,  412  sq. 
E/cSucrao-öat,  528. 
Eleatics,  39. 
Electio,  86  sq. 
Election,  and  conversion,  89,  90. 

in  view  of  faith,  91. 

according    to    Rom.    8:    29,    30, 
p.  90. 
Elipandus  of  Toledo,  God-man,  207. 
EUicott,  Eternal  damnation,  572. 
Elliot,  Second  advent,  537. 
Emanation,  theory  of,  109. 
Encratites.  Image  of  God,  159. 
Encyclopedists,  Inspiration,  403, 


End  of  world,  561. 
FivSvcraaOuL,  528. 
'ETTCvSvrraaöat,  528. 
'Fii'tpy-qriKa,  220. 
Ephesians  1:   4,  5,  p.  87,  93. 

2:   20-22,  p.  371. 

4:    9,  p.  240. 
Epicurus,  Ancient  Materialism,  41. 
Epiphanus,  Descent  into  hell,  246. 
Episcopal  system  in  Church,  382. 
ETTtöw/xta,   174. 

Erigena,  John  Scotus,  Comprehensi- 
bility  of  God,  42,  43. 

Trinity,  81. 

Predestination,  98. 

Creation,  112. 

Original  sin,  170. 

Freedom  of  will,  186. 

God-man,   207. 

Lord's  Supper,  465. 

Resurrection  body,   545. 

Eternal  damnation,  570,  571. 
¥i7n(f>avcta,  539. 
Ernesti,  Inspiration,   403. 
Error  of  Modern  Missouri,  102. 
Eschatology,  483  sqq. 

schools  of  interpretation,  534. 
Esdra?lon,  529. 

'Eo-TiV  in  Lord's  Supper,  450. 
Eternity,  God's,  50. 
Eternal  damnation,  566  sqq. 
Eternal  death,  566. 
Eternal  life,  573. 
Eternal  punishments,  569. 
Eternal  salvation,  572. 
Eternity  of  God,  50. 
Erepovatos,  80. 
Ethico-Theological    proof    of    God's 

existence,  24. 
'EmyyeAttw,  1  Peter  4:   6,  p.  241. 
Eudaimonistic    proof    of    God's    ex- 
istence, 21. 
Eunomius,  Comprehensibility  of 
God,  42,  43. 

Trinity,  79. 
Eusebius,  Trinity,  79. 

Godman,  206. 

Inspiration,  401. 

Lord's  Supper,  464. 
Eutychianism,  God-man,  206. 
Eutychianism,  Godman,  206. 
Evacuatio    in    Christ's    humiliation, 
246. 


Evangelical  Adventists,  572. 
Evolution,  theory  of,  109. 
Exaltation,  state  of,  238  sq. 
Excitatio,  305. 

Exinanition,  grades,  235  sq. 
Expiatio,  262  sq. 

Faith,  elements, 
notitia, 
assensus, 
fiducia,  318,  319. 

attributes,  320. 

effect  and  object,  321. 
Faith  and  justification,  331,  332. 
Faith  and  deeds  according  to  Paul 

and  James,  333. 
Fall,  the,  161  sqq. 
Farrar,  Eternal  damnation,  571,  572. 
Fatalism  in  Providence,  115. 
Faustus,  Predestination,  97. 
Fehr,  Fr.,  Justification,  341. 
Felix  of  Urgellis,  Godman,  207. 
Feuerhorn,  Kenosis,  248. 
Fichte,  God's  existence,  20. 

Pantheism,  40. 

Angels,  134. 

God-man,  208. 
Fidelitas,  62. 
Fides  directa,  320. 
Fiducia,  319. 
Filiatio,  75. 
Filioque,  80. 
Flacius,  Image  of  God,  158. 

Original  sin,  171. 
Flacians,  Conversion,  313. 

Regeneration,  349. 
Flensburg,  W.,  Church,  382. 
Florus,  Predestination,  98. 
Fonseca,  Omniscientia,  58. 
Formale  Baptismi,  425. 
Form  of  the  Lord's  Supper,  442. 
Forma    et    materia    of    Sacraments, 

415. 
Formula  Consensus  Helvetica,  402. 
Formula  of  Concord,  Predestination, 
99. 

Original  sin,  171. 

Freedom  of  will,  179,  180,  188. 

God-man,  208. 

Natures  of  Christ,  224. 

Christ's  exinanition,   230. 

Christ's  descent  into  Hades,  240. 

Two  States  of  Christ,  247. 

Conversion,  314. 

Justification,   340. 

Regeneration,  342. 


589 


Formula  of  Concord,  Law  and  Gos- 
pel, 412. 
Expression    "in,    with    and    un- 
der," 458. 
Manducatio  oralis,  459. 
Worthy  participation  in  Lord's 

Supper,  461. 
Lord's  Supper,  467. 
Founder  of  Church,  370. 
Frank,  Freedom  of  will,  188. 
Justification,  341. 
Testimony  of  Christian  experi- 
ence, 354. 
Death   and   Intermediate    State, 

500. 
Millennium,  530. 
Second  advent,  537. 
Resurrection,  550. 
Frank,  Sebastian,  Creation,  113. 
Fredigis  of  Tours,  Inspiration,  401. 
Freedom  of  will,  179  sqq. 
Freeman,  James,  Unitarianism,  84. 
Fries,  Inspiration,  403. 
Fulgentius     of    Ruspe,     Predestina- 
tion, 98. 
Fullness  of  Gentiles,  502. 
Function  of  reason,  33. 
Futurists,  534. 

Gabriel,  131. 

Galatians  4:  6,  p.  75. 

Gaunilo,  23. 

Gaussen,  Second  advent,  537. 

Técvva,  488. 

r^,  561. 

Gehenna,  568. 

Gelasius,  Lord's  Supper,  465. 

General  Revelation,  28. 

General  spread  of  Christianity,  501. 

Generatio,  negative  and  positive 

terms,  72. 
Generatio  seterna,  72. 
Genesis,   Creation,  107. 

1:  26,  p.  66. 

1:   27,  p.  155. 
Gentiles,  times  of,  502. 
Gentiles,  fullness  of,  502. 
Genus  Idiomaticum,  216. 
Genus   Majestaticum,   217. 
Genus  Apotelesmaticum,   225. 
George  of  Laodicea,  Trinity,  80. 

God-man,  205. 
Gerhard,  Cognitio  acquisita,  30. 

Knowledge  of  God,  34. 

Divine  attributes,  45. 

God's  eternity,  50. 


Gerhard,  Omnipresence,  54. 

Election,  91. 

Predestination,  100. 

Partes  contritionis,  315. 

Inspiration,  403. 

Baptism,  440. 

Lord's  Supper,  449. 

Ordination,  472. 

Signs  of  the  last  times,  521. 

Millennium,  530. 

Second  advent,  536. 

End  of  the  world,  564. 

Eternal  damnation,  571. 
Gerson,  Reconciliation,  275. 
Gesenius,    Eternal    damnation,    568, 

572. 
Gess,  Kenosis,  248. 
Giessen  school  on  Kenosis,  247. 
Gnosticism,  God-man,  203,  204. 
Gock,  Inspiration,  338. 
God,  concept,  34. 

comprehensibility,  34,  42. 

unity,  35. 

as  Absolute  Spirit,  38. 

as  Absolute  Personality,  38. 

unity   and   primitive   character- 
istics, 43. 

kingdom  of,  287. 
God-man,  190  sq. 

necessity  and  reality,  190,  191. 

possibility,  192. 
Godet,  Angels,  127. 
God's  existence,  19. 

proofs,  21. 

psychological-philosophical, 

21. 
euraimonistic,  21. 
ontological,  21. 
ethico-theological,  24. 
historical,  24. 
cosmological,  25. 
teleological,  26. 
God's  image,  156  sq. 
God's  relation  to  means  of  grace,  385. 
Gog  and  Magog,  536. 
Gomarists,  Predestination,   101. 
Good  works,  358. 
Göschel,  Reconciliation,  281. 
Gottschalk,  Predestination,  98. 
Government,  divine,  119. 

theory  of  atonement,   281. 
Grace  of  God,  296. 
Grace  of  the  Holy  Ghost,  295. 
Granfelt,  Knowledge  of  God,  34. 

Unity  of  God,  44. 

Divine  love,  61. 


590 


Granfelt,  Trinity,  84. 

Creation,  113. 

Kenosis,  250. 

Atonement,  283. 

Justification,  341. 

Baptism,  440. 

Intermediate  state,  500. 
Gratia    spiritus    sancti    applicatrix, 

296  sq. 
Gratia  prseveniens,  296. 
Gregory    of    Nazianzus,    Knowledge 
of  God,  43. 

Trinity,  80. 

Propagation  of  soul,  153. 

Original  sin,  170. 

Freedom  of  will,  186. 

God-man,  205. 

Atonement,  277. 

Lords'  Supper,  464. 

Death   and    Intermediate   State, 
498. 
Gregory  of  Nyzza,  Unity  of  God,  44. 

Trinity,  80. 

Election,  97. 

Propagation  of  soul,  153. 

Original  sin,  170. 

Freedom  of  will,  186. 

God-man,  205. 

Atonement,  277. 

Baptism,  438. 

Lord's  Supper,  464. 

Death    and    intermediate    state, 
498. 

Resurrection,  549. 

Eternal  damnation,  570. 
Gregory   the    Great,   Predestination. 
98. 

Original  sin,  170. 

Atonement,  278. 

Inspiration,  401. 

Baptism,  465. 

Purgatory,  498. 
Gregory  VII.,  Church,  380. 
Grotius,  Second  advent,  536. 
Grundtvig,  Church,  383. 

Inspiration,  404. 
Gubernatio,  119. 

Guinness,    H.    Grattan,    Second    ad- 
vent, 539. 
Guitmund,  Lord's  Supper,  465. 

Hades,  487  sq. 

New  Testament  passages,  488. 
Haeckel,  Creation,  109. 
Hafenreffer,  252. 
Hahn,  End  of  the  world,  565, 


Harless,  Propagation  of  soul,  153. 
Har-Magedon,  517,  529. 
Harvey,  Circulation  of  blood,  148. 
Hase,  Divine  attributes,  51,  53. 

Freedom  of  will,  188. 
Hasselquist,  Ministry,  481. 
Hebrews  2:    17,  p.  269. 

4:   15,  p.  262. 

9:   28,  p.  262. 

11:   1,  p.  318. 

11:   3,  p.  105. 
Hegel,    God's    existence,   20,    26,    27, 
40,  41. 

Trinity,  83. 

Original  sin,  172. 

God-man,  208. 

Reconciliation,  281. 

Church,  381. 
Hemisphserium  inferius  et  superius 

180. 
Hengstenberg,   Justification,  341. 

Second  advent,  537. 
Herman,  W.,  Justification,  341. 
Hermas,  Baptism,  437. 

Second  advent,  536. 
Hermes  Trismegistus,  Divine  attri- 
butes, 54. 
Hermogones,  Creation,  112. 
Hrrr^/xa,    175. 
Hetzer,  Trinity,  83. 
High-priestly     intercessory     prayer. 

273. 
Hilary  of  Poitiers,  God-man,  205. 

Evacuatio,  246. 
Hildebert  of  Tours,  Lord's   Supper, 

465. 
Hincmar,  Predestination,  98. 
Historical  proof  of  God's  existence, 

24. 
Hobbes,  Modern  Materialism,  41. 
Hofman,  Von,  Atonement,  282. 

Millennium,  537. 
Höfling,  Ministry,  480. 
Hollazius,  Supernatural  Revelation, 
30. 

Function  of  reason,  33. 

Knowledge  of  God,  34. 

Divine  attributes,  46. 

Love,  61. 

Predestination,  87. 

Romans  9,  94. 

Concursus,  117,  118. 

Gubernatio,  120. 

Image  of  God,  155,  157,  158,  160. 

Original  sin,  163. 

Sin  of  obduracy,  174. 


591 


Hollazius,    Sin    against   the    Holy 
Ghost,   177. 

Hemisphserium    inferius    et    su- 
perius,  180. 

Incarnation,  192. 

Personal  union,  210. 

Communion  of  natures,  211. 

Communicatio    idiomatum,    215. 

Resurrection,  242. 

Ascension,  243. 

Sessio  ad  dextram  Dei,  244. 

State  of  liumiliation,  248. 

High-priestly  intercessory  pray- 
er, 273. 

Gratia,  296. 

Vocatio,  302. 

Illuminatio,  306. 

Justificatio,  326. 

Regeneratio,  344. 

Mystical  union,  350. 

Bona  opera,  358. 

Conservatio,  362. 

Sacraments,  414. 

Baptism,  421,  440. 

Lord's  Supper,  442. 

Real  presence,  454. 

Potestas  clavium,  474. 

Resurrection,  541. 

End  of  the  world,  565. 

Eternal  fire,  572. 
Holy  Scripture,  inspiration  and  au- 
thority, 387  sq. 
Homoiousians,   80. 
Hornejus,  Freedom  of  will,  188. 
Huber,  Samuel,  Predestination,  101. 
Hugo  of  St.  Victor,  Original  sin,  170. 

Freedom  of  will,  186. 
Human  freedom,  181. 
Human  individuality  not  suppressed 

in  inspiration,  389. 
Human  race,  Unity  of,  145. 
Humanity  of  Jesus  Christ,  196. 
Hume,  God's  existence,  27. 
Hunnius,  Predestination,  101. 
Huss,  Predestination,  99. 
Hussites,   Antichrist,   504. 
Hutterus,  Church,  368. 

Baptism,  440. 
Huxley,  Modern  materialism,  41. 
Hylozoism,  109. 
Hylism,  135. 
Idealism,  41. 
iSiOTTOt'rycrts,  216. 
Ignatius,  Trinity,  78. 

God-man,  202. 

Reconciliation,  276. 


Ignatius,  Conversion,   323. 

Inspiration,  401. 

Baptism,  437. 

Lord's  Supper,  463. 

Ministry,  477. 

Eternal  damnation,  570. 
IA.acr/xos,  266. 
lAacTKecröat    269. 
Illumination,  306  sq. 
Image  of  God,  154  sq. 

attributes,  156,  157. 

purpose  and  object,  158. 
Immanent  attributes,  59. 
Immediatio  suppositi,  54. 
Immediatio  virtutis,  54. 
Immersion,  435. 
Immensitas,  51. 
Immortality,  proofs,  486. 
Immutabilitas,  51. 
Impanation,  445. 
Impeditio,  120. 

Imputation  of  original  sin,  166. 
Imputatio  mediata,  166. 
Incarnation,  192. 
Incommunicabilis,  71. 
Indemnificatio,  266. 
Infant  baptism,  429. 
Infirmitates  naturales,  197. 
Infirmitates  personales,  198. 
Influxus  Christi,  370. 
Infralapsarians,    Predestination,    97. 
Innocent  III.,  Vicar  of  Christ   and 
God,  380. 

Forbade  reading  of  Bible,  411. 

Private  confession,   418. 

Lord's  Supper,  465. 
Inspiration   of   Holy   Scripture,    387 
sq. 

definition,  388. 

dynamic  theory,  388,  396. 

mechanical  theory  refuted,  388. 

human    individuality    not    sup- 
pressed in,  389. 

constituent  parts,  394. 

verbal  inspiration,  396,  397. 
Intermediate  state,  487  sq. 
"In,  with  and  under"  in  Lord's  Sup- 
per, 457. 

Babylon  the  great,  517. 
Invination,  445. 
Iowa  Synod,  Predestination,  102. 

Ministry,  481. 
Irenaeus,  Evil  angels,  142. 

Image  of  God,  159. 

Original  sin,  169. 

Freedom  of  will,  185. 


592 


Irenaeus,  States  of  Christ,  246. 

Conversion,  323. 

Justification,  337. 

Churcli,  379. 

Inspiration,  401. 

Baptism,  437. 

Lord's  Supper,  464. 

Ministry,  477. 

Death    and    intermediate   state, 
497. 

Second  advent,  536. 

Resurrection,  549. 

End  of  the  world,  564. 

Babylon,  the  great,  517. 

Eternal  damnation,  571. 
Isa.  14:   4—17,  p.  487,  491. 

ch.  24—27,  p.  539. 

63:   1—6,  D.  518. 
Isadore  of  Seville,  Sacraments,  418. 

Jacobi,  God's  existence,  20. 
Jacobs,  H.  E.,  Election,  103. 

Efficacy  of  Word,  413. 

Resurrection  of  body,  551. 
James  2:   14,  22,  26,  p.  333. 
Janet,  26. 
Jansen,    Cornelius,    Predestination, 

101. 
Jansenists,  Predestination,   101. 

Inspiration,  402. 
Jerome,  Predestination,  97. 

Propagation  of  soul,  153. 

Reconciliation,  277. 

Inspiration,  401. 

Sacraments,  418. 

Ministry,  478. 

Antichrist,  504. 

Eternal  damnation,  571. 
Jesuits,  Predestination,  100. 

Inspiration,  402. 
Jesus  Christ,  humanity  of,  196. 

divinity  of,  195. 
Joachim  of  Floris,  Antichrist,  504. 
Job  38:   7,  p.  127,  130. 
Johansson,  M.,  Reconciliation,  284. 

Eternal  damnation,  572. 
John  1:    17,  p.  290. 

1:   18,  p.  73. 

3:  5,  p.  434. 

3:  13,  p.  221. 

3:  23,  p.  427. 

5:   43,  p.  506. 

8:  29,  p.  67. 

14:  2,  p.  576. 

14:  10,  p.  67. 

14:  10,  11,  12,  p.  319. 


John  of  Damascus,  18. 

God's  existence,  25. 

Comprehensiblity,  43. 

Unity  of  God,  44. 

God's  will,  56. 

Trinity,  81. 

Predestination,  98. 

Miracles,  126. 

Angels,  134. 

Propagation  of  soul,  153. 

Original  sin,  170. 

Freedom  of  will,  186. 

God-man,  206. 

Reconciliation,  278. 

Conversion,  324. 

Inspiration,  401. 

Sacraments,  418. 

Lord's  Supper,  465. 
John's   Baptism  and  the  Christian, 

422. 
John  of  Wesel,  Justification,  338. 
Johnson,   Gisle,  Regeneration,   345. 

Justification    and    regeneration, 
346. 

Church,  383. 

Baptism,  441. 
Judas  at  Lord's  Supper,  459. 
Judgment,  552  sqq. 

several  acts,  554,  555. 

factors,  556. 

day,  558. 

object,  561. 
Judicium  particulare  et  universale, 

552. 
Julius  Africanus,  Unity  of  God,  44. 
Justification,  325  sqq. 

definition,  326. 

a  judicial  act,  328. 

parts,  329. 

means,  331. 

faith,  332,  333. 

attributes,  333. 

purpose  and  effect,  334. 

eight   points   in   Formula   of 
Concord,  340. 

of  the  individual,  528. 
Justin  Martyr,    Aoyos  o-Trep/iaTiKo's. 
29. 

Natural   revelation,  29. 

Comprehensibility  of  God,  42. 

Unity  of  God,  44. 

Trinity,  78. 

Creation,  112. 

Miracles,  125. 

Angels,  134. 

Evil  angels,  142. 


593 


Justin  Martyr,  Propagation  of  soul, 
153. 

Image  of  God,  159. 

Original  sin,  169. 

Freedom  of  will,  185. 

God-man,  202. 

States  of  Christ,  246. 

Atonement,  276. 

Conversion,  323. 

Justification,  337. 

Church,  379. 

Inspiration,  401. 

Word  as  means  of  grace,  411. 

Sacraments,  418. 

Baptism,   437. 

Lord's  Supper. 

Ministry,  477. 

Death    and    intermediate    state, 
497. 

Antichrist,   504. 

Second  advent,  536. 

Resurrection,  549. 

End  of  the  world,  564. 

Eternal  damnation,  570. 
Justitia  interna,  59. 

externa,  59. 
Justitia  and  love,  60. 

infusa,  338,  339. 

originalis,  156. 

Kahnis,  Trinity,  84. 

Propagation  of  soul,  153. 

Conversion,  325. 

Inspiratioi,  403. 

Lord's  Supper,  468. 

Death    and    intermediate    state, 
499. 
Kant,  Proofs  of  God's  existence?  20, 
21,  23,  25,  27. 

Trinity,  83. 

Miracles,  126. 

Original  sin,  172. 

Freedom  of  will,  188. 

God-man,  208. 

Reconciliation,  281. 

Conversion,  325. 

Justification,  340. 

Church,  381. 

Inspiration,  403. 

Lords  Supper,   468. 

Death    and    intermediate    state. 
499. 
H-aTaWayrj^   260. 
Keil,  Reconciliation,  283. 
Kenosis,  228  sqq. 

omniscience,  232. 

Doffynatics.     20. 


Kenosis,  omnipresence,  233.    • 

modern,  236  sqq. 
Kevcocrts  )(py](T€w'i,  229. 
Krjpvaa-o)^  1  Peter  3:   19,  p.  241. 
Keys,  power  of,  474. 
Kierkegaard,  Church,  383. 
King,  Christ  as,  286. 
Kingdom  of  Christ,  287. 
Kingdom  of  God,  287. 
Kippurim,  262. 
Kliefoth,  Church,  382. 

Ministry,  480. 
Knowledge  of  divine  attributes,  46. 

via  negationis,  46. 

via  causalitatis,  46. 

via  eminentise,  47. 
Kotvwvta  in  Lord's  Supper,  452. 
Kotvwta  Twv  Octwv    217. 
König,  Status  exinanitionis,  227. 
Kocr/xos.  561. 
Krauth,  Original  sin,  164. 

Christ's  presence,  233. 

Lord's  Supper,  447,  453. 

Ministry,  481. 

Kr^o-ts,  220. 

Kurtz,  Reconciliation,  283. 

Laban,  Impeditio,  121. 
Laboriosus  baptismus,419. 
Lactantius,  Miracles,  126. 

Angels,  134. 

Evil  angels,  142. 

Original  sin,  169. 

Second  advent,  536. 

Resurrection,  549. 

End  of  the  world,  564. 

Eternal  damnation,  571. 
La  Mettrie,  Modern  materialism,  41. 
Landgren,  Regeneration,  346. 
Lanfrank,  Lord's  Supper,  465. 
Lange,  Propagation  of  soul,  153. 

Kenosis,  249. 

Lord's  Supper,  449. 
Laplace,  Creation,  108. 
Last  times,  500. 
Laud,  Wm.,  Ministry,  479. 
Law  and  Gospel,  407  sqq. 
Lectures  on  Apocalypse,  539. 
Leibnitz,  18. 

Trinity,  83. 

Evil,  126. 

Pre-established  harmony,  126. 

Miracles,  126. 


594 


INDEX. 


Leibnitz,  Original  sin,  172. 

Consubstantiation,  445. 

Immortality  of  soul,  499. 
Leo  the  Great,  Predestination,  98. 

Church,  380. 

Private  confession,  418. 

Lord's  Supper,  465. 
Lessing,  God-man,  208. 
Lev.  9,  p.  257. 

14:   4— G,  p.  425. 

26,  p.  509. 
Lex  moralis,  407. 

ceremonialis,  407. 

forensis,  407. 

tertius  usus,  407. 

primordialis,  407. 
Liebner,  Kenosis,  249. 
Life,  light  and  love,  47  sq. 
Limbus  infantum  et  patrum,  496. 
Aoyos   cnrepfj.dTiKO'i,  29. 

ivSidOero';,  78. 

7r/oo<^optKos,  78. 

ao-a/3KOs,  229. 

tvaapKO<;,  229. 
Löhe,  Church,  382. 

Ministry,  479. 
Lombard,  Peter,  Predestination,  98. 

Propagation  of  soul,  153. 

Original  sin,  170. 

Freedom  of  will,  187. 

God-man,  207. 

Reconciliation,  279. 

Conversion,  324. 

Sacraments,  418. 

Baptism,  438. 

Lord's  Supper,  465. 

Ministry,  478. 

Resurrection,  550. 
Lord's  Supper,  441  sq. 

form,  442. 

elements,  443. 

wine  in  the  Supper,  443. 

false  views,  445,  446. 

eight  positive  terms,  446  sqq. 

real  presence  of  sacramental  ob- 
jects, 452. 

effect  and  object,  459. 
Loss  of  free  will  in  spiritual  things, 

180. 
Lukas-legende,  392. 
Luke  1:   35,  p.  194. 

16:   23—31,  p.  488,  491. 

22:   20,  p.  450. 

23:    43,  p.  239. 
Luthardt,  Divine  attributes,  47,  51. 


Luthardt,  Miracles,  122. 

States  of  Christ,  250. 

Second  advent,  537. 
Luther,  Unity  of  God,   44. 

God's  will,  56. 

Trinity,  82. 

Predestination,  99. 

Angels,  134. 

Evil  angels,  142. 

Propagation  of  soul,  153. 

Image  of  God,  160. 

Original  sin,  171. 

Freedom  of  will,  187. 

God-man,  207. 

and  Zwingli  on  Genus  apoteles- 
maticum,  226. 

Reconciliation,  279. 

Conversion,  324. 

Church,  381. 

Inspiration,  402. 

Word  as  means  of  grace,  411, 

Baptism,  438. 

Mode  of  Baptism,  439. 

Lord's  Supper,  466. 

Ministry,  479. 

Death    and    intermediate   state. 
498. 

Antichrist,  504. 

Second  advent,  536. 

Resurrection,  550. 

End  of  the  world,  564. 

Eternal  damnation,  571. 
Lutheran    Church   and   private   con- 
fession, 419. 
Liitkeman,  States  of  Christ,  246. 
Lux,  48,  49. 

Macedonius,  Trinity,  80. 
Mai.  3:   1—3,  p.  427. 
Maldonatus,  Lord's  Supper,  449. 
Major,  Renovation,  359. 
Man,  Creation,  144. 
Manducatio  panis,  444. 

corporis  Christi,  444. 

spiritualis,  444. 
Mantic  theory  of  inspiration,  400. 
Marcellus  of  Ancyra,  Trinity,  80. 

God-man,  205. 
Marcion,  God-man,  203,  204. 
Mark  1:   15,  p.  315. 

3:   4,  p.  485. 

10:   14,  15,  p.  429. 

13:  10,  p.  501. 
Martensen,  Divine  attributes,  51. 

Eternity,  51. 

Omniscientia,  58. 


595 


Martensen,  Trinity,  84. 

Predestination,  102. 

Creation,  113. 

Evil  angels,  142. 

Origin?.!  sir,  172. 

Freedc:::  c:  will,  188. 

KenoExE,  249. 

Atonement,  283. 

Justification,  341. 

Sacraments,  420. 

Baptism,  440. 

Lord's  Supper,  468. 

Death    and    Intermediate    state, 
499. 

Resurrection,  550. 
Martineau,  James,  Trinity,  84. 
Materia  et  forma  ecclesige,  371. 
Materia  sacramenti,  416. 
Materialism,  41. 

Materialistic  theory  of  creation,  109. 
Matt.  13,  p.  389. 

16:   18,  p.  370,  371. 

16:   27,  28,  p.  525. 

17:  3,  p.  576. 

20:   28,  p.  268. 

24:   14,  p.  501. 

24:  34,  p.  526. 

27:  52,  53,  p.  542. 

28:   19,  p.  428. 
Maurice,  Reconciliation,  282. 

Eternal  damnation,  572. 
Maurus  Rabanus,  Predestination,  98. 
Maximus  Confessor,  Trinity,  81. 
Means  of  grace,  384  sqq. 

necessity,  384. 

God's  relation  to,  385. 

effect,  386. 
Mechanical  theory  of  inspiration, 

388. 
Mechanism  in  Providence,  115. 
Mediating  theologians  on  the  Word 

as  a  means  of  grace,  412. 
Melanchthon,  Trinity,  82. 

Propagation  of  soul,  153. 

Freedom  of  will,  188. 

Reconciliation,  279. 

Conversion,  324. 

Word  as  means  of  grace,  411. 

Lord's   Supper,  467. 
Menius,  Renovation,  359. 
Menken,  Reconciliation,  282. 
Mentzer,  Kenosis,  248. 
Meritum  congrui  et  condigni,  187. 
Meravoia,  315. 
Meyer,  Propagation  of  soul,  153. 

Eternal  damnation,  572. 


Michael,  131,  133. 
Michaelis,  295. 
Microcosm,  145. 
Microtheos,  145. 
Millennium,  529  sqq. 
Ministry,  469  sqq. 

call,  470. 

ordination,  472. 
Milky  Way,  577. 
Minucius  Felix,  God's  existence,  26. 

Unity  of  God's  being,  44. 
Miracles,  122  sqq. 

possibility,  123. 

truth,  124. 

object,  124. 
Missouri  Synod,  Election,  102. 

Church,  383. 

Ministry,  481. 
Modalists,  Trinity,  78. 
Modern  Spiritualism,  142. 
Modus  communicandi  in  Genus  ma- 

jestaticum,  219. 
Modus  of  creation,  105. 
Mohammedanism   Eastern  Anti- 
christ, 540. 
Möbler,  445. 

Moleschott,  God's  existence,  27. 
Molina,  Louis,  Omniscientia,  58. 

Predestination,   100. 
Monarchians,  Trinity,  78. 

God-man,  202. 
Monotheletism,    God-man,    206. 
Moral  bondage,  179. 
Moral  proof  of  God's  existence,  24. 
Moral  theory  of  reconciliation,  282. 
Morbus,  164. 
Mop^v/,  228. 
Mors  corporalis,  484. 
Miiller,  Julius,  Unity  of  God,  44. 

Propagation  of  soul,  153. 

Original  sin,  172. 

Freedom  of  will,   188. 

Kenosis,  249. 
Multivoliprsesens,  247. 
Miinchmeyer,  Church,  382. 
Munus  triplex  Christi,  252,  256,  285. 
Murray,  Eternal  damnation,  572. 
Musseus,  Propagation  of  soul,  153. 

Freedom  of  will,  188. 

Inspiration,  403. 
Myrberg,  Second  advent,  538. 
Mystical    theory    of    reconciliation, 

282. 
Mystical  union,  350  sq. 


596 


Natural  revelation,  28. 
Naturalistic    theory    of    inspiration, 

400. 
Nazarenes,  Trinity,  78. 
Neander,  Propagation  of  soul,  153. 
Necessitas  ordinationis,  472. 
Necessitas  vocationis,  470. 
Neo-Platonisni,  Trinity,  81. 

Creation,  112. 
Nestorianism,  God-man,  205. 
Nestorius,  God-man,  205. 
New  birth,  342  sqq. 
Nihilism,  207. 
Nihilum  negativum,  105. 

privativum,  105. 
Nikolai,  Kenosis,  247. 
Nineveh,  52. 
Nitzsch,  Divine  attributes,  47. 

Propagation  of  soul,  153. 

Freedom  of  will,  188. 

Word  as  means  of  grace,  412. 
Noetus,  Trinity,  79. 

God-man,  203. 
Nohrborg,  Regeneration,  346. 

Testimony   of   the    Holy    Spirit, 
355. 

Resurrection,  542. 
Norbeck,  Conversion,  325. 
Nordhausen,  Antinomianism,  412. 
Norma  normans,  389,  399. 

normata,  398,  399. 
Notiones  personales,  75. 
Notitia,  319. 

Numerical  and  specific  unity,  151. 
Number    of    sacraments.    Catholic 
and  Protestant,  417. 

Obedientia  activa  et  passiva,  261. 
Oblatio,  266. 

Obsessio  corporalis  et  &piritualis,lo9. 
Occam,  Angels,  134. 

Lord's  Supper,  465. 
Occasionalism  in  Providence,  115. 
Oecolampadius,   Justification,   339. 

Lord's  Supper,  466. 
Oetinger,  End  of  the  world,  565. 
Officium  elenchticum,  295. 
Olshausen,  Propagation  of  soul,  153. 
Omnipotence,  55,  220. 
Omnipresence,  53,  221. 
Omnisapience,  58. 
Omniscience,  57,  220. 
'OfioLovaiS,  80. 
OfMOOvaiU)  69,  77. 

Ontological  proof  of  God's  existence. 
21. 


Ontological  Trinity,  72. 
Opera  attributiva,  76. 

CEConomica,  76. 
Optatus  of  Mileve,  Church,  280. 
Order  of  salvation,  295. 

Conversion  and  regeneration, 
298. 

Justification  by  faith  and  regen- 
eration, 299,  300,  346,  347. 
Ordination,  472. 
Ordo  salutis,  295  sqq. 
Origen,  Nature  of  God,  42. 

Primitive   characterictics   of 
God.  44. 

Omniscientia,  58. 

Generatio  seterna,  79. 

Predestination,  97. 

Creation,  111,  112. 

Miracles,  126. 

Angels,  134. 

Evil  angels,  142. 

Image  of  God,  159. 

Original  sin,  169. 

Freedom  of  will,  186. 

God-man,   204. 

States  of  Christ,  246. 

Paying  of  the  ransom  to  Satan, 
277. 

Justification,  337. 

Church,  380. 

Inspiration,  401. 

Word  as  means  of  grace,  411. 

Baptism,  437. 

Baptism,  437. 

Death    and    intermediate    state 
498. 

Resurrection,  549. 

End  of  the  world,  564. 

Eternal  damnation,  571. 
Original  righteousness,  156. 
Origin  of  sin,  161  sqq. 

characteristics,   165. 

effects,  167. 
Orion,  577. 

Origin  of  sin,  161  sqq. 
Osiander.  Natures  of  Christ,  226. 

Kenosis,  247. 

Justification,  339. 
'Quo-tu,  80. 

Pajon,  Predestination,  101. 
Pajonism,  101. 
IlaAiyyci'ecrtu,  562. 

Pantheists  on   supernatural    revela- 
tion, 31. 
Papias,  Second  advent,  536. 


597 


Papacy  Western  Antichrist,  540. 

Tlapd/3a<TL<;^    175. 

Paradise,  489. 

TlapaKor]^    174. 

rrapaTTToj/xa,  175. 

Uapép^oifjLaL,  562. 

JJapova-La,  523,  539. 

Parmenides,  39. 

Parseism,  135. 

Parsimonius,  Descent  into  liell,  246. 

Reconciliation,  281. 
Pascal,    Blaise,   Predestination,    101. 
Paschasius   Radbertus,   Lord's   Sup- 
per, 465. 
Paternitas,  75. 
Patripassians,  Trinity,  78. 

God-man,  203. 
Paul  of  Samosata,  Trinity,  78. 

God-man,  203. 
Paulicians,  God-man,  206. 
Peccatum  originale  originans,  164. 

originale  originatum,   164. 
Pelagians,  Predestination,  97. 
Pelagius,  Original  sin,  170. 

Freedom  of  will,  186. 
Perfectio  of  the  Word  of  God,  398. 
Perfectiones    principales    et    minus 

principales,  156. 
nept;^ajj07^(rts,   71,  77,  81. 
Permissio,  120. 
Perrone,  445. 
Perseverantia,  365. 
Personal   union   of   two   natures    of 

Christ,  210. 
Personal  propositions,  213. 
Personality  of  Satan,  135. 
Personification  theory  of  evil,  135. 
Prespicuitas    of   the    Word    of   God, 
399. 

1  Peter  2:  8,  p.  96. 

2:   24,  p.  268. 

3:   4,  p.  147. 

3:    18—20,  pp.  240,  241,  493. 

4:  6,  pp.  241,  493. 

2  Peter  3:  5,  6,  10,  12,  p.  562. 
Petersen,  End  of  the  world,  565. 
Pfaff,  Inspiration,  403. 
Pfeffinger,  Freedom  of  will,  188. 
Phil.  1:  1,  p.  477. 

2:   6,  7,  p.  228. 
Philippi,  Comprehensibility  of  God, 
43. 
Unity  of  God,  44. 
Divine  attributes,  46,  47. 
Trinity,  68,  84. 


Philippi,   Predestination,  102. 

Angels,  135. 

Kenosis,  250. 

Reconciliation,  283. 

Conversion,  325. 

Testimony  of  the  Spirit,  354. 

Inspiration,  404. 

Antichrist,  505. 

Second  advent,  537. 

Resurrection,  550. 
Philo,  Propagation  of  soul,  153. 
Pholoponus,  John,  Trinity,  81. 
Phocas,  511. 
Fhotius,  Trinity,  81. 
Pieper,  Conversion  and  election,  103. 
Pietists,  Ministry,  479. 
Piscator,  Reconciliation,  281. 
Plato,  Creation,  112. 

Propagation  of  soul,  153. 
Pleiades,  577. 
UXrjix/xékeLa^    175. 
Plotinus,  Creation,  112. 
Pluralitas  hypostatica,  68. 
Ylvevfxa  6  öeds,    36. 
Pneumatology,  293  sqq. 
Poach,    Andreas,    Antinomianism, 

412. 
Poense  damnatorum,  569. 
Pcenitentia,  314. 
Polaris,  577. 
Polycarp,  Ministry,  477. 
Pope  and  Antichrist,  504  sqq. 
Possessio  corporalis,  139. 

spiritualis,  139. 
Postmillennialism,  529  sq. 
Potestas  clavium,  474. 

ministerii  ecclesiastic!,  474. 
Pouring  in  Baptism,  435. 
Power  of  keys,  474. 
Prsedestinatio,  85  sq. 

late  dicta,  85,  86. 

stricte  dicta,  86,  87. 

et  electio,  86  sq. 

in  relation  to  reprobatio,  86  sq 

and  foreknowledge,  88. 

and  omniscience,  89. 

sola  gratia,  89. 

in  the  view  of  Rom.  8,  29,  30, 
p.  90. 
Prsedicata,  44. 

Prseparatio  in  judgment,  557. 
Praesentia  intima  et  extima,  247. 
Praxeas,  Trinity,  79. 

God-man,  203. 
Preadamites,  146. 


598 


Pre-established    harmony,    Leibnitz, 

126. 
Pre-existence,  149. 
Premillennialism,  529  sq. 
Presentists,  534. 
Preservation,  116. 
Preterists,  534. 

Priestly,  James,  Unitarianism,  84. 
Priscillianists,  God-man,  205. 
Private  confession,  418,  419. 
Probation  after  death,  493  sqq. 
Processio,  75. 
Ilpoyvwo-ts,    87,  95,  114. 
Promulgatio  sententiae,  558. 
Proofs  of  God's  existence,  21  sq. 
ITpooptCT/A09j  87. 
Propagation  of  soul,  149. 

theories, 

pre-existence, 

creationism, 

Traducianism,  149. 
Prophetic  numbers,  509  sqq. 
Prophetic  office  of  Christ,  252  sq. 
Propositiones  personales,  213. 
Proprietates,  44. 
Proprietates  personales,  75. 
Protagoras,  41. 
Up60eaL<i,   87,  95,  114. 
Providence,  113  sq. 
Providentia  ordinaria,  113. 

extraordinaria,  113,  122. 

object,  115,  122. 

generalis,  116. 

specialis,  116. 

specialissima,  116. 

concursus,  117. 
Prudentius,  Predestination,  98. 
Psychological-philosophical    proof, 

21. 
Psychopannychism,  490. 
Punishment  of  fallen  angels,  141. 
Purgatory,  492. 
Puseyism,  Ministry,  479. 

Quenstedt,  Natural  revelation,  29. 
Knowledge  of  God,  34. 
Divine  attributes,  45. 
Generatio,  72,  73. 
Election,  Rom.  9,  p.  94. 
Creation,  104. 
Providence,  114. 
Preservation,  116. 
Concurrence,  117. 
Permission,  120. 
Impeditio,  121. 
Directio,  121. 


Quenstedt,  Determinatio,  121. 

Image  of  God,  157,  160. 

Original  sin,  161. 

Derelictio,  281. 

Intercessio,  273,  274. 

Regal  office,  285. 

Justification    and    regeneration. 
345. 

Mystical  union,  350. 

Inspiration,  403. 

Lord's  Supper,  449. 

End  of  the  world,  564. 

Eternal  damnation,  571. 
Quesnel,  Creation,  101. 

Rabanus  Maurus,  Lord's   Supper, 

465. 
Raimund   of   Sabunde,   God's   exist- 
ence, 24. 

Trinity,  82. 

Ministry,  478. 
Ramsay,  Das  Lukas-legende,  392. 
Rapture,  539. 
Rathman,  Word  as  means  of  grace, 

412. 
Rationalists,  Image  of  God,  160. 

Reconciliation,  281. 

Church,  381. 

Inspiration,  403. 

Word  as  means  of  grace,  412. 

Sacraments,  420. 

Lord's  Supper,  467. 
Ratramnus,  Trinity,  81. 

Predestination,  98. 

Lord's  Supper,  465. 
Real  presence  in  Lord's  Supper.  452. 

objections  answered,  455,  456. 
Reason  and  revelation,  32. 
Reatus  culpae  et  pcenae,  164. 
Recapitulation  theory  of  atonement, 

275. 
Reconciliation,  257  sqq. 

necessity,  257. 

subject,  259. 

attributes.  267. 
vicaria,  267. 
universalis,  269. 
sufEcientissima   et   consum- 

•  matissima,  269. 

object,  269. 

effects,  271. 
Reformed  Church,  Renunciation, 
245,  247. 

Justification,  339. 

Inspiration,  400,  402. 

Word  of  God,  410. 

Absolution,  419,  420. 


599 


Regal  office  of  Christ,  285. 
Regeneration,  342  sqq. 

causes,  348. 

starting  point,  349. 

in  Baptism,  342. 
Regnum  potentiae,  288. 

gratise,  288. 

justitiaj,  291. 

glorife,  292. 
Reimarus,  God-man,  208. 
Reinhard,    Deatli   and    intermediate 

state,  499. 
Relly,  Eternal  damnation,  572. 
Renovation,  355  sqq. 

definition,  356. 

degrees,  357. 

proof  in  good  works,  358. 

object,  361. 
Repentance,  315. 
Reprobation,  95. 
Res  celestis,  416,  424,  444. 

terristris,  416,  424,  443. 
Restoration  of  all  things,  563. 

of  Israelites  and  Jews,  514. 
Resurrectio  interna,  239. 

externa,  242. 
Resurrection,   540   sqq. 

the  first,  542  sqq. 

of  judgment,  543. 

identity  of  body,  544  sqq. 

of  body,  546. 
Resuscitatio,  541. 

Return  of  Christ,  certainty  of,  527. 
Rev.  2  and  3,  pp.  289,  290. 

4:  4,  p.  542. 

5,  p.  523. 

9:  20,  p.  502. 

10:   6,  p.  509. 

11:   3,  9,  11,  p.  511. 

11:   13,  p.  519. 

13:   2,  p.  508. 

13:   5,  p.  509. 

13:   11—17,  pp.  508,  509. 

16:   14,  16,  p.  529. 

19:   11—16,  pp.  291,  292. 

20,  p.  530. 

20:   4,  5,  p.  550. 

20:  11,  p.  565. 

20:  12,  p.  557. 

21:   1,  2,  p.  576. 
Revelation,  natural,  28. 

general,  28. 

supernatural,  30. 
Revelation  and  inspiration,  391. 
Revival  meetings,  306. 
Ribera,  Second  advent,  536. 


Richard   of  St.   Victor,   God's  exist- 
ence, 25. 

Trinity,  82. 
Ritschl,  God-man,  209. 

Reconciliation,   283. 

Justification,  341. 
Ritschlianism,  Sacraments,   420. 
Rom.  8:  9,  p.  75. 

8:  26,  p.  274. 

9:  11  sq.,  p.  94. 

9:  18,  p.  174. 

11:   15,  p.  503. 
Roman  Catholic  doctrine  of  original 
sin,  168. 

Freedom  of  will,  185. 

Christ,  201. 

Atonement,  280. 

Conversion,  322. 

Justification,  335. 

Inspiration,  400. 

Tradition,  402. 

Word,  410. 

Sacraments,  417,  419. 

Absolution,  419. 

Penance,  419. 

Baptism,  435. 

Lord's  Supper,  462,  466. 

Ordination,  476. 

Purgatory,  492,  496. 
Roos,  Justification  and  regeneration, 

346. 
Roscellinus,  Trinity,  81. 
Rosenkrantz,  Miracles,  123. 
Rothe,  Omniscientia,  58. 

Inspiration,  403. 
Rudin,  W.,  Church,  383. 

Sabellianism,  God-man,  203. 
Sabellius,  Trinity,  79. 

God-man,  203. 
Sacerdotal  offiice  of  Christ,  256  sqq. 
Sacraments,  414  sqq. 

forma  et  materia,  415. 

effects,  416. 

number,  417. 
Sadducees  and  resurrectton,  546. 
Sanctitas,  59. 

Sartorius,  Reconciliation,  282. 
^dp$,   175. 
Satan,  135. 
Satisfactio,  261  sq. 

obednentia  activa,  261. 

obedientia  activa,  261. 

limitata,  280. 

superabundans,  279. 

Anselmis  doctrine,  278,  280. 


600 


Savonarola,  Justification,  338. 
Scaligor,  John,  Lord's  Supper,  467. 
Scliaff,  Lord's  Supper,  449. 
Schartau,  Regeneration,  346. 

Conversion,  325. 

Lord's  Supper.  468. 
Schéele,  Illumination,  308. 

Caritas   fide   formata,   322. 

Efficacy  of  Word,  412,  413. 
Schelling,   God's   being,   40. 

Evil  angels,  142. 

Reconciliation,  281. 
Schleiermacher,    Divine    att.ioutes 
46,  47. 

Trinity,  83. 

Predestination,  lui. 

Creation,  113. 

Miracles,  126. 

Angels,  134. 

Evil  angels,  142. 

Image  of  God,  160. 

Original  sin,  172. 

Freedom  of  will,  188. 

God-man,  209. 

Reconciliation,  282. 

Justification,  340. 

Church,  381. 

Inspiration,  403. 

Sacraments,  420. 

Baptism,  440. 

Lord's  Supper,  468. 

Death    and    intermediate    state, 
499. 

End  of  the  world,  565. 

Eternal  damnation,  570,  572. 
Schmalcald  Articles,  Contrition,  324. 

Lay  preaching,  472. 

Antichrist,  504. 
Schmid,  Divine  attributes,  47. 
Scripture,  Holy,  387  sqq. 
Schwenkfeld,  God-man,  308. 

Justification,  340. 

Lord's  Supper,  467. 
Scientia  necessaria  seu  naturalis,  57. 

simplicis  intelligentise,  57. 

libera„57. 

media,  57,  58. 
Second  coming  of  Christ,  521. 
Second  epiphany,  539. 
Seiss,  Apocalypse,  539. 

Resurrection,  551. 

End  of  the  world,  565. 

New    heavens    and    new    earth, 
565. 
Selnecker,   Resurrection,   550. 
^rjjxclov^   123. 


Semi-Arians,  Trinity,  80. 
Semi-Pelagianism,   186. 
Semi-Pelagians,    Predestination,    97. 
Semler,  Evil  angels,  142. 

Inspiration,  403. 
Servetus,  Comprehensibility  of  God, 
42. 

Trinity,  83. 
Sessio  ad  dextram   Dei,  244. 
Seuche,  164. 

Seven  year  covenant,  516. 
Seventh  head  of  the  beast,  508. 
Severians,  Image  of  God,  159. 
Sheol,  487  sqq. 
Signs  of  last  times,  510. 
Silentium  verborum,  etc.,  309. 
Similitudo,  155. 
Sin,  original,  161. 

formale,  171. 

actual,  173. 

against  the  Holy  Ghost,  177,  178. 
Sirius,  577. 
Socinians,  Trinity,  83. 

Predestination,  100. 

Image  of  God,  160. 

Original  sin,  172. 

Freedom  of  will,  188. 

God-man,  208. 

Reconciliation,  280. 

Justification,  340. 

Inspiration,  402. 

Sacraments,  420. 

Baptism,  440. 

Lord's  Supper,  467. 

Death    and    intermediate    state, 
499. 
Socinus,  Faustus,  Trinity,  83. 

Death    and    intermediate   state, 
499. 
Socrates,  God's  existence,  26. 
Sola  fide,  332  sq. 
Soteriology,  251  sqq. 
Spencer,  God's  being,  41. 
Spener,  Second  advent,  536. 
Spinoza,  God's  being,  35,  40. 

Creation,  113. 
Sprinkling  in  Baptism,  435. 
Stahl,  Church,  382. 
Stancarus,  Natures  of  Christ,  226. 

Justification,  339. 
States  of  Christ,  227. 
Status  corruptionis,  161. 

integritatis,  154. 

ecclesise,  376. 

exaltationis,  238. 

exinanitionis,  227. 


601 


Stier,  Inspiration,  404. 

Lord's  Supper,  449. 
Strauss,  Miracles,  124. 

God-man,   209. 

Church,  381. 
Striegel,  Original  sin,  171. 

Freedom  of  will,  188. 
Subpanation,  446. 

Suggestio  rerum  et  verborum  in  in- 
spiration, 394  sq. 
2vyKpa(7tSj   205. 
Si'i'ac^eta^    206. 

Sundberg,  A.  N.,  Church,  382. 
Supernatural  revelation,  30. 

possibility,  31. 

necessity,  32. 

reality,  32. 
Supralapsarians,  Predestination,  97. 
Supranaturalists,  Image  of  God,  172. 

Atonement,  281. 

Conversion,  325. 

Church,  381. 

Word  as  means  of  grace,  412. 

Lord's  Supper,  467. 
Suso,  Justification,  338. 
Swedenborg,  Angels,  134. 

Death    and    intermediate    state, 
499. 
Symbolical  theory  of  Lord's  Supper, 
446. 

Tabhal,  426. 

Tao-o-o),  Acts  13:    48,  p.  94. 

Tatian,  Evil  angels,  142. 

Original  sin,  169. 

Death    and    intermediate    state, 
497. 

Eternal  damnation,  570. 
Tauler,  Reconciliation,  275. 
Tepas,   123.    • 
Terminology,  44. 
Terrores  conscientiffi,  315. 
Tertullian,  Comprehensibility  of 
God,  42. 

Trinity,  79. 

Creation,  112. 

Miracles,  126. 

Evil  angels,  142. 

Propagation  of  soul,  153. 

Image  of  God,  159. 

Original  sin,  169. 

Freedom  of  will,  185. 

God-man,  204. 

States  of  Christ,  246. 

Reconciliation,  2777. 


Tertullian,  Conversion,  323. 

Justification,  337. 

Church,  379. 

Inspiration,  401. 

Word  as  means  of  grace,  411. 

Baptism,  437. 

Lord's  Supper,  464. 

Ministry,  477. 

Second  advent,  536. 

Resurrection,  549. 

End  of  the  world,  564. 

Eternal  damnation,  571. 
Testimonium    spiritus   sancti    inter- 
num, 352. 
Tetratheism,  81. 
Theodicy,  120. 

Theodoret,  Lord's  Supper,  465. 
Theodotus,  Tanner,  Trinity,  78. 

God-man,  202. 
Theodotus,  Money  Changer,  Trinity, 
78. 

God-man,  202. 
Theology,  19  sqq. 

science  of,   17. 
Theophilus  of  Antioch,  God's  exist- 
ence, 26. 

Trinity,   78. 
Theories  of  creation,  145. 

Coadamites,  146. 

Autochthones,  146. 

Transmutation    theory    of    Dar- 
win, 146. 
Theory  of  limitation,  404. 
QeoTOKO';,  206. 
2  Thess.  2:    3—10,  p.  505. 
Tholuck,  Inspiration,  403. 
Thomas,  see  Aquinas. 
Thomasius,  Unity  of  God,  43. 

Divine  attributes,  44,  46. 

Trinity,  84. 

Predestination,  102. 

Propagation  of  soul,  153. 

Freedom  of  will,  188. 

Kenosis,  249. 

Atonement,  283. 

Conversion,  325. 

Words  as  means  of  grace,  404. 

Sacraments,  420. 

Baptism,  440. 

Lord's  Supper,  468. 

Death    and    intermediate    state, 
499. 

Resurrection,  550. 

End  of  the  world,  565. 
Thomists,  Baptism,  438. 
Thousand  years,  529  sqq. 


602 


INDEX. 


Thumniius,  States  of  Christ,  247. 
2  Tim.  2:  19—21,  p.  360. 

4:   6,  p.  573. 
Times,  the  last,  500. 

of  the  Gentiles,  502. 
Titus  3:  4—6.  p.  434. 
Toletus,  Concursus,  118. 
TöUner,  Inspiration,  403. 
Tov  TTOvepov,   135. 
TovTo  in  Lord's  Supper,  449. 
Traducianism,  149. 
Transubstantiation,  445. 
Trichotomy,  471. 
Trinity,  62  sq. 

methods  of  explanation,  63. 

terminology,  67. 

ontological,  72  sq. 

economical,  76. 
Tritheism,  81. 

Tubingen   School,   States   of  Christ, 
247. 

Ubeitas,  128. 
Ubiquity,  244,  452,  453. 
Ullman,  U.  L.,  Ministry,  480. 
Unio  personalis,  209. 

in  Lord's  Supper,  446. 
Unitarianism,  84. 
Unity  of  human  race,  145. 
Unity  of  God,  35,  43. 
Universalism,  570. 
Universalismus  hypotheticus,  101. 
Usus  legis,  407. 
Utilitas  pjedagogica, 

paedeutica, 

didactica,  30. 

Valentinus,  God-man,  203. 
Veracitas,  60. 
Verbum  audibilc,  414. 

invisible,  414. 
Vicarious  atonement,  267  sq. 
Via  causalitatis,  46. 

eminentife,  46. 

negationis,  47. 
Vilmar,  Church,  382. 

Ministry,  480. 
Vincent  of  Lerins,  Church,  380.' 
Vinet,  Church,  383. 
Virchow,  Creation,  109. 
Vita,  48  sq. 
Vitium,  164. 
Vocation,  301  sqq. 

means  and  mode,  303. 

attributes,  304. 

object,  305. 


Voltaire,  Inspiration,  403. 
Voluntas  necessaria,  56. 
libera,  56. 
beneplaciti.  56. 
signi.  56. 
Voluntarium  subjective  et  effective, 

173. 
Von  Hofmann,  Reconciliation,  282. 

Second  advent,  537. 
Von   Holbach,   Modern   materialism, 

41. 
Von    Nordhausen,    Antinomianisra, 
412. 


Waldensians,  Antichrist,  504. 
Waldenstrom,  Reconciliation,  284. 
Walther,  102.  481. 
Wegscheider,  Conversion,   325. 

Justification,   340. 

Church.  381, 
Weidner.  End  of  the  world.  565. 
Weigel,  Justification,  340. 
Wesel.  Justification,  338. 
Wessel.  God-man.  207. 

Justification,  338. 
Whitby,  Postmillennialism,   536. 
Wickliffe,   Predestination.  99. 

Justification,  338. 

Word  as  means  of  grace,  411. 
Wilfner,-  Church,  383. 
Winkelmann,  Kenosis,   248. 
Wolff,  18. 

Wörterinspiration.  404. 
Wortinspiration.  404. 
World,  end  of  the.  561  sq. 


Xenophanes.  Unity  of  God.  39. 


'Y-Trip  and  'avrt,   268. 
Y7ro(rrtt(Tts,  67.  80. 


Zeno,  Unity  of  God,  39. 
Zeschwitz,  Illumination,  308. 
Zwingli,  Predestination,  99. 

Original  sin,  171. 

God-man,  207. 

Alloesis,  218.  226. 

Justification.  339. 

Inspiration,  402. 

Word  as  means  of  grace,  411. 

Sacraments,  420. 

Baptism,  439. 

Lord's  Supper,  466. 


CORRECTIONS 


Page  143,  line  13.     Omit  "and." 

Page  197,  line  2  from  below.     Read  "inflrmitates. 

Page  218,  line  23.    For  "possess"  read  "possesses.' 

Page  245,  line  11.     Omit  "III." 

Page  372,  line  3  from  below.     Read  "Ka(9'  o\ov". 


Date  Due 

f; 

J.         -      -^ 

5 

^L  ..  -  '4^ 

^'^'7  7 

21  "5^ 

' 

^ 

